Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Trade
1 2 3 4 14 13 12 11
This volume is a product of the staff of the International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development / The World Bank. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in
this volume do not necessarily reflect the views of the Executive Directors of The World
Bank or the governments they represent.
The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The
boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work
do not imply any judgement on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of
any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.
For permission to photocopy or reprint any part of this work, please send a request with
complete information to the Copyright Clearance Center Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive,
Danvers, MA 01923, USA; telephone: 978-750-8400; fax: 978-750-4470; Internet:
www.copyright.com.
All other queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to
the Office of the Publisher, The World Bank, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433,
USA; fax: 202-522-2422; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org.
ISBN: 978-0-8213-8763-4
eISBN: 978-0-8213-8764-1
DOI: 10.1596/978-0-8213-8763-4
Acknowledgments xv
Contributors xvii
Abbreviations xix
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
Thomas Farole and Gokhan Akinci
v
vi Contents
Introduction 25
Historical Development of EPZs in Bangladesh 27
Performance 29
Key Success Factors 33
Challenges for the Future 38
Conclusion 43
Notes 44
References 45
Introduction 47
Historical Development of Free Zones in
Honduras 48
Performance 49
Key Success Factors 54
Challenges for the Future 61
Conclusion 65
Notes 67
References 68
Notes 97
References 98
Interviews 100
Background 101
Introduction to Suzhou Industrial Park 102
The Strategy of the Chinese and Singaporean
Governments 104
Partnership Structure 105
The Knowledge-Sharing Process 107
Challenges to the Partnership 110
Overcoming Partnership Challenges and
Implementing Innovations 113
Conclusion 115
Appendix 5.A. Selected Indicators:
Developments at SIP, 1994–2008 121
Appendix 5.B. SIP Timeline and Major Milestones 122
Notes 124
References 125
Introduction 127
Regional Trade Agreements 129
Implication of RTAS for SEZs 134
Harmonization of SEZs: Beyond Tariff Issues 143
Conclusion 149
Appendix 6.A Regulations and Handbooks of
Regional Trade Agreements 150
Appendix 6.B Summary of Tariff-Related
Measures Taken by Regional Trade Agreements
for Special Economic Zone–Processed Goods 151
Notes 154
References 155
viii Contents
Introduction 159
Free Zones in the Dominican Republic 162
Performance and the Challenge of Adjustment 166
The Policy Response 172
Current Situation and Conclusions 175
Notes 180
References 181
Introduction 183
SEZs as an Instrument for Innovation 184
The Need for Absorptive Capacity and
Local Linkages 189
A Staged Approach to Building an
Innovative SEZ 197
Conclusion 200
Notes 202
References 202
Context 207
The Confused Definitions and Aims of
Special Economic Zones 210
Examples of Successful SEZs 214
The Potential Role of ERZs in Sub-Saharan Africa 220
Conclusions: ERZs and Economic Reform in
Sub-Saharan Africa 223
Contents ix
Note 224
References 224
Introduction 227
The Policy Environment 227
Overview of MEPZ Performance 230
Today’s Challenges 235
The MEPZ and Economic Reform 237
Conclusion 240
Notes 243
References 244
Introduction 247
Background on Trade and Gender 248
The Economics of Female-Intensive
Production in SEZs 253
Evidence on Gender in SEZs 255
Quality of Female Employment in SEZs 262
Defeminization of Employment 266
Conclusion and Policy Implications 269
Notes 272
References 274
Introduction 283
Low-Carbon, Green SEZs: Overview 284
Low-Carbon (Green) SEZ Framework 287
x Contents
Index 309
Boxes
2.1 Incentives Offered in Bangladesh EPZs 37
2.2 The Labor Counselor Program 40
2.3 The Korean EPZ: The First Private EPZ in Bangladesh 42
2.4 The Economic Zones Act 43
3.1 Incentives in the Honduras Free Zones 50
3.2 San Pedro Sula: Key Agglomeration for the
Export Sector 58
3.3 The Critical Role of Domestic Investors in
Attracting FDI 60
3.4 Instituto Politécnico Centroamericano 65
4.1 Timeline: Tianjin TEDA in Egypt 75
4.2 Challenges in the Lekki Free Zone in Nigeria 93
5.1 SIP Free Trade Zone Development 116
7.1 The Apparel Sector in the Dominican Republic 160
7.2 Gulf and Western Establishes the Dominican Republic’s
First FZ in 1969 162
7.3 Profile of the Dominican Republic’s Free Zones in 2010 164
7.4 Grupo M Pioneered the Strategy of Production Sharing
between FZs in the Dominican Republic and Haiti 174
8.1 The First Modern SEZ, Shannon, Ireland 186
8.2 The Development of Backward Linkages:
A Successful and Less Successful Example 194
8.3 SEZs and Labor Circulation: A “Domestic Diaspora”? 195
8.4 A Tale of Two Countries: Investment Climate Reform 196
8.5 SEZs in Cambodia 199
10.1 Targeting Productivity Improvements in the EPZs 234
Figures
2.1 Exports (US$ millions) and Contribution to
National Exports (percent) of EPZ Enterprises 30
2.2 Employment Generation in EPZs
(Year-Wise and Cumulative) 32
Contents xi
Tables
1.1 Summary of Types of Zones 2
2.1 Summary of EPZs, 2009 28
2.2 Operating Enterprises in the EPZs by Sector, 2009 30
3.1 FDI in Manufacturing Activities 51
3.2 FDI in Manufacturing by Country of Origin 51
3.3 Value-Added Contribution by Manufacturing in
“Industry” and “Maquila Industry” 52
4.1 Structure of Investment in China-Africa SEZs 84
5.1 SIP Key Statistics 103
5.2 FDI Utilized, US$ Billion 112
8.1 Direct and Indirect Benefits of SEZs 185
8.2 Training for Workers in SEZs 191
8.3 Staged Approach to the Development of an SEZ:
The Shenzhen Case 201
8.4 Some Policies Aimed at Stimulating Innovation
through SEZs 202
9.1 Export Processing Zone Performance, Six Asian
Economies 212
9.2 Ratio of Firms, Workers and Profits to Urban Population
Share, Chinese Regions, 1996 219
Contents xiii
The editors extend their sincere gratitude to all the authors who took the
time to contribute to this volume. In addition, they thank the peer
reviewers whose comments and feedback provided invaluable guidance
to the authors and editors: Magdi Amin, Kishore Rao, Marilou Uy, and
Michael Wong. Thanks also are extended to others who provided com-
ments on the book or individual chapters, including Sumit Manchanda,
Martin Norman, Harun Onder, and José Guilherme Reis.
Thanks also to Cynthia Abidin-Saurman, Igor Kecman, Charumathi
Rao, Marinella Yadao, and Aimee Yuson for support on administrative
and financial matters, and to Stephanie Chen and Stacey Chow for sup-
port on publishing and marketing matters.
Finally, thanks to the Bank-Netherlands Partnership Program, which
provided the generous financial support under which this project was
conducted.
The book was produced under the overall supervision of Mona
Haddad (sector manager) and Bernard Hoekman (sector director) in the
International Trade Department of the World Bank.
xv
Contributors
Editors
Thomas Farole Senior Economist, International Trade
Department, World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Gokhan Akinci Lead Investment Policy Officer, Investment
Climate Department, International Finance
Corporation and World Bank, Washington,
D.C.
xix
xx Abbreviations
Introduction
Thomas Farole and Gokhan Akinci
Ask three people to describe a special economic zone (SEZ) and three
very different images may emerge. The first person may describe a
fenced-in industrial estate in a developing country, populated by footloose
multinational corporations (MNCs) enjoying tax breaks, with laborers in
garment factories working in substandard conditions. In contrast, the
second person may recount the “miracle of Shenzhen,” a fishing village
transformed into a cosmopolitan city of 14 million, with per capita gross
domestic product (GDP) growing 100-fold, in the 30 years since it was
designated as an SEZ. A third person may think about places like Dubai
or Singapore, whose ports serve as the basis for wide range of trade- and
logistics-oriented activities.
In fact, all three of these are correct descriptions of this diverse instru-
ment: Table 1.1 provides a brief summary of the different types of zones
in existence. This table highlights the many ways in which the concept of
“special” economic zones has been operationalized and underscores the
challenge of attempting to say anything specific about such a heteroge-
neous policy tool. But despite the many variations in name and form, all
SEZs can be broadly defined as—
1
2
In this book, we use SEZ as a generic expression (as per FIAS, 2008)
to describe the broad range of modern economic zones discussed in this
book (see table 1.1). But we are most concerned with two specific forms
of those zones: (1) the export processing zones (EPZs) or free zones (zona
francha in our case studies on Honduras and the Dominican Republic),
which focus on manufacturing for export; and (2) the large-scale SEZs,
which usually combine residential and multiuse commercial and indus-
trial activity. The former represents a traditional model used widely
throughout the developing world for almost four decades. The latter rep-
resents a more recent form of economic zone, originating in the 1980s in
China and gaining in popularity in recent years. Although these models
need not be mutually exclusive (many SEZs include EPZ industrial parks
within them), they are sufficiently different in their objectives, invest-
ment requirements, and approach to require a distinction in this book.
SEZs have a long-established role in international trade. Entrepôts and
citywide free zones that guaranteed free storage and exchange along
secure trade routes—such as Gibraltar, Hamburg, and Singapore—have
been operating for centuries. The first modern industrial free zone was
established in Shannon, Ireland, in 1959.1 Before the 1970s, most zones
were clustered in industrial countries. But since the 1970s, starting with
East Asia and Latin America, zones have been designed to attract invest-
ment in labor-intensive manufacturing from MNCs. These zones became
a cornerstone of trade and investment policy in countries shifting away
from import-substitution policies and aiming to integrate into global
markets through export-led growth policies.
SEZs normally are established with the aim of achieving one or more
of the following four policy objectives (FIAS 2008):
low labor costs, scale economies, and preferential access to major con-
sumer markets like the Europe, Japan, and the United States, economic
zones—with their access to duty-free inputs, quality, flexible infrastruc-
ture, and often generous fiscal incentives—proved to be a powerful instru-
ment through which to capture increasingly mobile foreign investment.
This era may well have come to an end, however, for several reasons.
Although trade has recovered significantly from the depths of the 2008
and 2009 economic crisis, it is clear that the United States and European
economies can no longer be the ony engines of global demand.
Responding in part to the crisis as well as longer-term strategic trends,
lead firms in global production networks are increasingly consolidating
their supply chains, both in terms of suppliers and production locations.
Much of this consolidation increasingly is being entrenched in “factory
Asia.” Linked closely to the issues discussed thus far, the expiration of the
Multi-Fiber Arrangement (MFA)2 at the end of 2004 has had a huge
impact on the cost competitiveness of textile and apparel manufacturing
in EPZs in Latin America, Africa, and Eastern Europe in relation to low-
cost Asian producers.
Thus, for countries that have not yet established economic zones pro-
grams, the traditional variety targeting multinational assembly activities
within global production networks is far from the sure thing that it used to
be. In the absence of massive labor cost advantages (e.g., Bangladesh and
Vietnam) or scale (e.g., China), most countries will need to design more
sophisticated strategies—beyond the basic EPZ—to attract MNCs. For
countries that already have established EPZ programs, the challenge is
perhaps more acute. It is about remaining competitive, which in the
absence of aggressive, long-term dampening of real wages, means upgrading
production capabilities and attracting investment in higher value-added
activities. But, as we will see from the examples in Parts I and II of this
book, this is precisely where the EPZ models have often let down countries
by creating an incentive environment that restricted adjustment processes.
Indeed, recent years have seen a shift away from the traditional EPZ
model. In its place, zone development is moving toward the SEZ model,
with emphasis on physical, strategic, and financial links between the zones
and local economies, and a shift away from fiscal incentives to value added
services and a greater focus on differentiation through the investment
climate in the zone. Although many of these zones eschew the narrow
focus of traditional EPZs in favor of multiuse developments encompassing
industrial, commercial, residential, and even tourism activities, others are
moving to highly specialized developments focused on specific high-end
Introduction 7
1. How to make economic zones successful in attracting firms that create jobs:
This could be called a first-order or static measure of success.
2. How to ensure that zones are economically sustainable and deliver positive
externalities, including facilitating upgrading and structural transformation
and catalyzing economic reforms: This could be called a dynamic mea-
sure of success.
3. How to ensure that economic zones are sustainable from an institutional,
social, and environmental perspective: This means not only minimizing
negative externalities but, if possible, delivering noneconomic benefits
to the society.
8 Special Economic Zones
It is clear, however, that the model is now increasingly reaching its limits.
Indeed, it is perhaps no longer fit-for-purpose, given the changing mac-
roeconomic and regulatory environment in the global economy. This
creates significant challenges for developing countries that are in the
early stages of developing their zone programs. As we will see from the
case studies in Part I, some of the basic principles at the heart of tradi-
tional EPZs are no longer (or perhaps never were) sustainable sources of
competitiveness.
But regardless of the model, it is also apparent that some countries have
been more successful than others in using zones to attract FDI, to encour-
age export-oriented production, and to create jobs. Indeed, reviewing the
experience of economic zones across many countries over the past three
decades, some clear principles emerge regarding the policies and practices
that are associated with static success. The case studies in part I—of
Bangladesh and Honduras, and of the experience of the recent Chinese
investments in SEZs in Africa—highlight many of these principles.
In chapter 2, we examine Bangladesh, a country that perhaps high-
lights the contrasting recent fortunes between zones programs in low-cost
Asian countries and those that have been established in Latin America
and Africa. Mustafizul Hye Shakir and Thomas Farole describe how
Bangladesh’s EPZ program has become part of the latest wave of benefi-
ciaries from multinational outsourcing in the classic low-wage-based gar-
ment sector. While the expiration of the MFA (for the garment sector)
and the continuing trend of tariff liberalization has eroded the benefits of
trade preferences for most zone programs, wage-based competitiveness
can still be critical in many sectors. The case of Bangladesh emphasizes
the importance of positioning the zone program to leverage the country’s
comparative advantage. Indeed, while the program in Bangladesh initially
aimed to attract high-technology investment, it took off only when it
made a concerted effort to focus on the garments sector, in which it had
a clear comparative advantage. The case of Bangladesh also highlights
another observation about SEZs—that is, their incubation period. Even
the biggest SEZ success stories like China and Malaysia started slowly and
took at least 5 to 10 years before they began to build momentum. In
Bangladesh, the program started in the early 1980s, but it only began to
attract investment on a large scale in the early 1990s (a similar evolution
is seen the Honduras case study). From a policy perspective, this means
that governments need to be patient and to provide consistent support to
zone programs over long time periods, a particular challenge in countries
whose political cycles are rather shorter.
10 Special Economic Zones
programs have established the conditions for ongoing exchange, and the
accompanying hard and soft technology transfer, between the domestic
economy and investors based on the zones. This includes investment by
domestic firms into the zones, forward and backward linkages, business
support, and the seamless movement of skilled labor and entrepreneurs
between the zones and the domestic economy.
From a policy perspective, this suggests shifting from a traditional
fenced-in EPZ model to an SEZ model that eliminates legal restrictions
on forward and backward links and domestic participation. But it also will
require implementation of much broader policies beyond the scope of
any SEZ program, including the following: promoting skills development,
training, and knowledge sharing; promoting industry clusters and target-
ing links with zone-based firms at the cluster level; supporting the inte-
gration of regional value chains; supporting public-private institutions,
both industry specific and transversal; and ensuring labor markets are free
to facilitate skilled labor moving across firms.
Chapter 7 presents the example of the Dominican Republic, one of
the pioneers in establishing economic zones programs in the Western
Hemisphere. Jean-Marie Burgaud and Thomas Farole illustrate how the
traditional EPZ model initially had a transformative impact on the
Dominican Republic, not just in terms of investment, exports, and jobs
but also in shifting the economy radically away from a reliance on
agricultural commodities. At its peak, the zones program contributed
7.5 percent of total GDP and was responsible for 90 percent of the
country’s exports.
However, the nature of the zone regime, including its reliance on fiscal
incentives and wage restraint, and its enclave nature, which contributed
to its prolonged failure in establishing significant forward and backward
links with the Dominican economy, ultimately condemned it to an
inevitable deterioration of competitiveness. Indeed, the recent macroeco-
nomic trends discussed earlier in this chapter have accelerated these
processes so that the competitiveness gap is now too large to be closed by
the “artificial sources” of the EPZ regime, exposing the adjustment chal-
lenge for the zones program.
The case of the Dominican Republic highlights that while low labor
costs, trade preferences, and fiscal incentives each can play a role in cata-
lyzing a zone program, they are almost never sustainable. Indeed, they
create pressure for further distortions and race-to-the-bottom policies,
including extending and increasing incentives (rather than addressing
more difficult factors of the investment environment) and granting
Introduction 15
Conclusion
With more than 100 countries worldwide operating SEZ programs and
several thousand individual zones, it is perhaps not surprising that huge
diversity exists in terms of their objectives, design, and implementation.
As a result, policy makers, donors, and private sector investors have a vast
range of challenges and opportunities to consider. This book addresses
only a small set of them, but in doing so, it sets out a substantial policy
and operational agenda.
As SEZ programs continue to proliferate around the world, particu-
larly in developing countries, it will be critical for policy makers to learn
from past experiences and to anticipate the implications of the emerging
and future issues discussed in this book. Under the framework of attract-
ing investment and creating jobs, facilitating dynamic benefits, and ensur-
ing sustainability, this section set out a number of key principles for policy
makers to consider. There is no need to enumerate these principles here.
However, it is worth repeating that achieving success with SEZ programs
in the future will require adopting a more flexible approach to using the
instruments of economic zones in the most effective way to leverage a
country’s sources of comparative advantage, and to ensure flexibility to
allow for evolution of the zone program over time. Most fundamentally,
this will require a change in mind-set away from the traditional reliance
on fiscal incentives and wage restraint, and instead focusing on facilitating
a more effective business environment to foster firm-level competitive-
ness, local economic integration, innovation, and social and environmental
sustainability. It also will require proactive, flexible, and innovative policy
approaches to address today’s significant macroeconomic constraints and
the many unanticipated challenges that no doubt will shape the environ-
ment in the years to come.
Notes
1. However, a form of industrial free zone was established in Puerto Rico as
early as 1948 (Farole 2011).
2. The MFA, which originated in 1974, was a system of quotas and voluntary
export restrictions that resulted in quantitative restrictions on the textile and
20 Special Economic Zones
garment exports used to protect the markets of the main importing countries
of Europe and North America.
3. The recent doubling of the minimum wage in the garment sector shows that
wage restraint is not likely to be a policy of the government.
4. Lesotho does not, in fact, operate any formal zones program.
5. Most of the developers are state-owned enterprises.
References
Boyenge, J. P. S. 2007. ILO Database on Export Processing Zones, Revised. Geneva:
International Labour Organization.
Chen, J. 1993. “Social Cost-Benefit Analysis of China’s Shenzhen Special
Economic Zone.” Development Policy Review 11 (3): 261–71.
Farole, T. 2011. Special Economic Zones in Africa: Comparing Performance and
Learning from Global Experiences. Washington, DC: World Bank.
FIAS (Foreign Investment Advisory Service). 2008. Special Economic Zones.
Performance, Lessons Learned, and Implications for Zone Development.
Washington, DC: World Bank.
Hamada, K. 1974. “An Economic Analysis of the Duty Free Zone.” Journal of
International Economics 4: 225–41.
Jayanthakumaran, K. 2003. “Benefit-Cost Appraisals of Export Processing Zones:
A Survey of the Literature.” Development Policy Review 21 (1): 51–65.
Johansson, H., and L. Nilsson. 1997. “Export Processing Zones as Catalysts.” World
Development 25 (12): 2115–28.
Kaplinsky, R. 1993. “Export Processing Zones in the Dominican Republic:
Transforming Manufactures into Commodities.” World Development 21 (11):
1851–65.
Kusago, T., and Z. Tzannatos. 1998. “Export Processing Zones: A Review in Need
of Update.” SP Discussion Paper 9802. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Madani, D. 1999. “A Review of the Role and Impact of Export Processing Zones.”
World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 2238. Washington, DC:
World Bank.
Milberg, W., & M. Amengual. 2008. Economic Development and Working Conditions
in Export Processing Zones: A Survey of Trends. Geneva: International Labour
Organization.
Mongé-Gonzalez, R., J. Rosales-Tijerino, and G. Arce-Alpizar. 2005. “Cost-Benefit
Analysis of the Free Trade Zone System: The Impact of Foreign Direct
Investment in Costa Rica.” OAS Trade, Growth and Competitiveness Studies,
Organization of American States, January.
Introduction 21
Introduction
Bangladesh is an extremely densely populated country (150 million
people living on less than 150,000 square kilometers). Despite this
density, the country relies mainly on agriculture to support the majority
of its population. Although Bangladesh has a historical reputation for
producing the finest quality textiles and jute products, and long has
been a hub for trade, the country has a low industrial and manufactur-
ing base. Jute was the main export of Bangladesh for decades: during
the 1950s to the 1960s, almost 80 percent of the world’s jute was pro-
duced in Bangladesh. However, from the 1970s onward, the global jute
industry faced a long period of decline as a result of the development
of synthetic substitutes.1 The gap in exports was filled by the textile and
garment sectors, which gained a quick foothold in international mar-
kets, taking advantage of Bangladesh’s low labor costs to attract inves-
tors from other Asian economies (particularly the Republic of Korea;
25
26 Special Economic Zones
Taiwan, China; and Hong Kong SAR, China) that faced quotas resulting
from the MFA.
But the country’s phenomenal growth in garments was experienced
only in the last decade. Indeed, in the early 1980s, Bangladesh had only
50 garment factories, employing only a few thousand people. It was dur-
ing this time that the EPZ program was established—a move that would
prove to have a substantial impact in catalyzing the development of the
garment sector in the coming decades.
Bangladesh now has nearly 4,500 garment manufacturing units, employ-
ing almost 2 million workers (50 percent of the industrial workforce in
the country), and contributing 75 percent of the country’s total export
earnings (Bangladesh Bank 2009). Garment exports in Bangladesh have
continued to grow strongly despite the recent global economic crisis.
Although accounting for a minority of employment and exports, the
EPZs are at the heart of Bangladesh’s dynamic garment sector. By provid-
ing serviced land, a supporting infrastructure, a transparent and relatively
efficient regulatory environment, and a regime of incentives, the EPZs
have played a critical role in attracting large-scale FDI. This environment
has had a knock-on effect, catalyzing additional investment by domestic
entrepreneurs in recent years.
As of 2009, the EPZs in Bangladesh employ more than 200,000 and
account for a substantial share of national exports and investment.
However, the program faces a number of challenges going forward. Chief
among these challenges are how to maintain competitiveness while also
upgrading wages and working conditions for EPZ workers, and how to
achieve diversification outside of the garment sector. This diversification
will require changes in the zones program itself. Indeed, the traditional
EPZ model on which the program is based has become increasingly
archaic, and a number of reforms are necessary to ensure that it remains
an engine of economic growth into the future—in particular, private sec-
tor development and management of zones, implementation of World
Trade Organization (WTO)–consistent policy and incentive frameworks,
and more innovative regulatory frameworks. A new Economic Zones Act,
which was passed in July 2010, represents an important step in addressing
these challenges.
This chapter provides a brief history of the development of EPZs in
Bangladesh and discusses its successes and the factors that have contrib-
uted to it. It then assesses the key challenges facing the Bangladesh’s
export sector going forward and the role of the EPZs in addressing these
challenges.
The Thin End of the Wedge 27
EPZs, on the other hand, typically are larger (the smallest ones are in
excess of 40 hectares), walled, secured, and considerably well maintained
and managed. Moreover, the package of incentives available in the new
EPZs for export-oriented activity was not available in any other industrial
estate in the country (see Section 3, Performance, for a detailed discussion
on the incentives regime).
Despite this progress, the EPZs caught on only gradually. It took
almost 10 years for the zone to host a meaningful number of companies.
But with the growth in global production networks in the garment sector
during the 1990s, Bangladesh’s EPZs took off. A second EPZ was started
outside Dhaka in 1993 (and later expanded) and an additional six have
been opened since then, with several more in the pipeline.
Today, eight EPZs are operating under BEPZA, with two new zones in
the planning stages. In addition, a privately developed zone, operated by
the Youngone Corporation of the Republic of Korea, is under construc-
tion near Chittagong. Although the zones are spread throughout the
country, in reality, economic activity in the EPZs is highly concentrated:
of the eight operating zones, just two of them—Chittagong EPZ and
Dhaka EPZ—account for more than 80 percent of the companies operat-
ing in the EPZs (see table 2.1).
Other than Chittagong and Dhaka, all the EPZs have been launched
since 2000. The Adamjee and Karnaphuli EPZs were established on the
grounds of suspended state-owned enterprises (SOEs, the former an old
jute milling complex and the latter a steel mill), which the government
had handed over to BEPZA. The Adamjee EPZ is fully operational and
has been attracting investment at a fairly rapid rate. Karnaphuli is partly
in the project stage, but it too already has attracted some investment.
Performance
After a modest start, the EPZ program made substantial advancements
within a short period of time. The EPZs employ a large number of work-
ers and account for a substantial share of exports and FDI in Bangladesh.
Given the size of the Bangladesh economy, however, the contribution of
the zones to GDP and employment is modest. Moreover, the program
remains highly concentrated in labor intensive, low skill manufacturing.
The remainder of this section reviews the results of the EPZ program
in terms of (1) firms and investment, (2) exports, (3) employment, and
(4) domestic market linkages.
Exports
Promotion and development of exports is a key objective of BEPZA.
In this regard, it has been quite successful since the early 1990s (see
figure 2.1). Exports have grown rapidly, at an average annual rate of
23 percent since 1993, to reach nearly US$2.5 billion by 2008. EPZ
3,000 20%
18%
2,500 16%
2,000 14%
12%
1,500 10%
8%
1,000 6%
500 4%
2%
0 0%
5
8
–9
–9
–9
–9
–9
–0
–0
–0
–0
–0
–0
–0
–0
–0
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Source: BEPZA.
The Thin End of the Wedge 31
Employment
In a country with millions entering the workforce annually, the contri-
bution of the EPZs to employment generation is crucial. In terms of
this objective, the EPZ program has been modestly successful. As of
2009, about 220,000 jobs had been created in the EPZs. Although this
represents fairly substantial job creation over a short period of time
(most of it has taken place only since the early 1990s), it is important
to put this number into perspective. With a workforce of 70 million in
Bangladesh, EPZ jobs are virtually a drop in the ocean. Even relative to
the industrial workforce, the EPZ jobs contribute only about 3 percent
of total employment. In fact, even in the garment sector up to 90% of
jobs exist outside the EPZs, although evidence suggests that at least
some of these jobs exist because of the competitive export sector inside
the EPZs.
Nevertheless, EPZ jobs have had an important, positive impact on the
economy, particularly because the majority of jobs created within them
are held by women (data from BEPZA indicate that women account for
64 percent of employees in the EPZs). Nearly 60 percent of all jobs in the
EPZs are in Chittagong, which accounts for nearly 136,000 jobs; another
72,000 jobs are in Dhaka EPZ. Unlike many other EPZ programs globally,
the Bangladesh EPZs do not rely extensively on foreign labor. In fact,
99.5 percent of all employees in the EPZs are Bangladeshi—foreign
workers account for less than 1,200 jobs in the EPZs.
Figure 2.2 outlines the annual and cumulative rates of employment in
the EPZs. Over the past 10 years, nearly 15,000 new jobs have been cre-
ated annually in the EPZs. Over this time, evidence indicates that labor
productivity has been increasing steadily, if not spectacularly. Exports per
worker in the EPZs rose by an average of 2 percent annually between
1998 and 2008, reaching a level of more than US$11,000.
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
8 4
85 5
8 6
8 87
8 8
89 9
9 0
9 1
9 2
93 3
9 4
95 5
9 6
9 7
9 8
9 9
0 0
01 1
0 2
0 3
04 4
0 5
0 6
07 07
8
19 3–8
19 4–8
19 –8
19 7–8
19 8–8
19 –9
19 0–9
19 1–9
19 2–9
19 –9
19 4–9
19 –9
19 6–9
19 7–9
19 8–9
20 9–0
20 0–0
20 –0
20 2–0
20 3–0
20 –0
20 5–0
–0
19 6–
20 6–
8
19
Source: BEPZA.
350
300
49
250
US$/month
200 41 62
150
264 38 3
37
100 25 184 163
50 14 112 115
77 96
32
0
h
DR
as
na
l
ga
ni
th
s
na
ur
de
a
za
ne
so
Gh
nd
et
la
Se
Le
Vi
ng
Ta
Ho
Ba
base benefits
sector remains weak, and regulations and weak institutions make setting
up a business extremely difficult, for both foreign and domestic investors.
Bangladesh ranks 119 of 183 countries in the World Bank’s Doing Business
index for 2010 (World Bank 2009). In some key components of the
index, in which Bangladesh has fared worst, it is clear that the EPZ envi-
ronment helps investors to overcome significant constraints. In particular,
these constraints relate to accessing and developing serviced land
(Bangladesh ranked 176 of 183 countries on the measure “registering a
property”), obtaining licenses, and other regulatory constraints. Other
important investment climate constraints identified—for example, in the
World Bank’s Enterprise Surveys (World Bank 2008)—include corrup-
tion and unreliable power. The environment for both of these constraints
is at least partly improved inside the EPZs. Finally, companies operating
inside the EPZs report that internal security protects them from such
issues as labor unrest, vandalism, and petty extortion, which are problem-
atic outside the zones.
source for BEPZA). Although the country faces an acute power shortage,
BEPZA’s power supply takes priority over other national usage. BEPZA
also has allowed companies to produce power within the zone for the
zone’s use only, and several of these power plants (some under public-
private partnerships (PPPs)) are expected to be in operation soon.
In addition to this core infrastructure, BEPZA also develops and main-
tains a wide range of key supporting infrastructure in the zone, including
business and commercial infrastructure, administrative infrastructure, and
infrastructure to support leisure, family, and quality-of-life issues. These
include the following:
Incentives Regime
The core fiscal incentive offered in the zones is a 10-year tax holiday,
followed by an additional five years with a 50 percent reduction
(the normal corporate tax rate for industrial companies ranges from
27.5 percent for publicly traded companies to 37.5 percent for
nonpublicly traded companies7). This incentive is broadly in line with
The Thin End of the Wedge 37
Box 2.1
Nonfiscal incentives
Despite these benefits, worker rights in the zones were poorly protected
for a long time. EPZs have been exempted from national labor regula-
tions. The EPZ Act, in an apparent effort to provide a more favorable
investment environment, suspended the application of the 1969 Industrial
Relations Ordinance and subsequent amendments, which provide for the
right to organize labor unions and enter into collective bargaining agree-
ments, as well as other labor-related legislation. Consequently, labor
unions have been prohibited in the zones.
In 2004, against international pressure, Parliament passed the EPZ
Workers Association and Industrial Relations Act 2004 (amended October
2010). This granted the workers some leeway to establish a franchise of
workers. Although limited to only certain types of collective activity, the
act allows the workers to organize elections to represent their demands
and participate in collective actions in harmony with BEPZA’s other
regulations. This is a step toward rights to free collective union. Under this
legislation, however, a ban on strikes and lockouts remained. The legisla-
tion was originally set to expire at the end of 2008, but BEPZA was able
to extend it through October 2010.
In the absence of national regulations, BEPZA follows a suggested
set of instructions regarding labor relations, which are referred to as
“Instruction 1” and “Instruction 2.” These instructions have been the rules
and regulations bible in terms of the worker-owner-BEPZA relationship
and compliance, and therefore they provide an established reference
point. The problem is that, although the de facto situation in most firms
in the EPZs is relatively good, the de jure situation as per Instructions
1 and 2 not only offers weak protection of workers’ rights but also speci-
fies lower benefits to what is available under the national labor regulations.
In addition, capacity to monitor and enforce regulations is limited.
As a result of this inconsistency, and in light of the recent labor unrest
and the massive protests against some of the factory owners, BEPZA has
made efforts to improve worker-owner relations in the zones. One com-
ponent of this effort was the establishment of a Labor Counselor Program
(see box 2.2). After an initial pilot, 67 counselors were recruited to act as
go-betweens and resolve problems between workers and managers. These
counselors worked closely with the workers and the management and
reported progress to BEPZA. They were extension workers of BEPZA
and became solid advocates for the workers’ concerns and rights. This
project, originally funded by the World Bank, has been slightly modified
and sustained through funding by the Bangladesh Investment Climate
Fund (BICF).
40 Special Economic Zones
Box 2.2
Diversification
When the Board of Investment established the first EPZ in Chittagong,
the mandate was to accept only high-technology companies and not to
attract labor-intensive garment companies. This, in part, explains the long
delay in filling up the EPZ. Apparently, it was only after one garment
company called itself “Hi Tech Knitwear” that they were allowed into the
zone. This paved the way for other garment companies and the EPZs
subsequently took off.
Since that time, there has been much talk about diversifying the indus-
trial base of the EPZs, but little to no concerted action has been taken to
effect such change. Across all the EPZs in Bangladesh, garment produc-
tion accounts for two-thirds of companies and close to 90 percent of jobs.
Despite the BEPZA’s repeated statements of intent to deny any more
garment investments into the EPZs to promote diversification, as late as
December 2009, new garment projects had been accepted. In recent
years, the EPZs have shown little to no diversification and no apparent
targeted investment promotion strategy that will effect such a change.
Within the garment sector as well, upgrading over the years has been
limited. Although the EPZs have suppliers across the range of inputs,
assembly, and finishing, few companies have become full-package sup-
pliers, with the vast majority carrying out simple cut, make, and trim
activities.
Box 2.3
Box 2.4
• Establish one law to govern all economic zone programs in the country
• Create a broader and more flexible model for zones allowing exports as well as
local sales
• Bring larger areas under special regimes, which may include existing EPZs and
industrial estates
• Set clear and objective criteria for site selection and mandatory feasibility stud-
ies to eliminate discretionary powers and erratic decision making
• Facilitate an increased role of the private sector in ownership, management,
and operation of zones
• Allow a light-handed approach to the regulation of zones
• Ensure that all zones are operated on commercial principles and the market to
drive the price of services
• Allow the conversion of any zone into an SEZ with parameters fulfilled
• Make a provision for declaring large geographic areas to be brought under
special administrative and incentive regimes to allow “brownfield” approach
Source: Authors.
will address many of the reforms (see box 2.4). The act moves
Bangladesh beyond the traditional EPZ regime to embrace a broader
SEZ or “economic zone” model. Specifically, it allows for much larger
scale zones and takes a more flexible approach to the types of activities
that can be undertaken within the zones. In addition, not only does the
new act put greater emphasis on private sector participation in zone
development, but it also substantially alters the role of BEPZA by split-
ting its regulator function from its development and management role.
Finally, it ensures more private provision of public goods in the zones as
well as PPPs.
Conclusion
In 2008, BEPZA celebrated its 25th anniversary. What started as a pilot
program has now become a large and substantial element of the
44 Special Economic Zones
Notes
1. Although in recent years, demand for natural fibers has grown, leading to
a substantial rise on the global market and prices for raw jute (de Vries
2007).
2. As of March 2009, BSCIC operated 74 industrial estates.
3. Assumes that approximately 80 percent of EPZ investments accrue from
FDI.
4. In a survey conducted in 2006, DEDO had more than 2,000 pending applica-
tions, 30 percent of which were from 2004; in most cases, drawback takes
3–18 months and significant amounts of paperwork to be processed.
5. An estimated less than 10 percent of eligible duty drawback is claimed
through the system.
6. The data presented here on wages in Bangladesh were obtained before the
July 2010 decision to raise the national minimum wage substantially.
7. The vast majority of EPZ companies are not publicly traded.
The Thin End of the Wedge 45
References
Bangladesh Bank. 2009. Available at http://www.bangladesh-bank.org (accessed
December 14, 2009).
BEPZA (Bangladesh Export Processing Zones Authority). 2009a. Available at http://
www.epzbangladesh.org.bd/.BEPZA 2009b. “Investment Opportunities in
the EPZs of Bangladesh.” Presentation to the World Bank Group, Dhaka,
March 2009.
BEPZA (2010) Available at http://www.epzbangladesh.org.bd/bepza.php?
id=YREMPL.
de Vries, Johan. 2007. “Export of Jute Products from Bangladesh to Europe:
Analysis of Market Potential and Development of Interventions for GTZ-
PROGRESS.” Available http://essay.utwente.nl/639/ (accessed December 16,
2009).
Farole, T. 2011. Special Economic Zones in Africa: Comparing Performance and
Learning from Global Experiences. Washington, DC: World Bank.
World Bank. 2008. Harnessing Competitiveness for Stronger Inclusive Growth:
Bangladesh Second Investment Climate Assessment. Washington, DC: World
Bank.
World Bank. 2009. Doing Business 2010: Country Profile for Bangladesh, Comparing
Regulation in 183 Economies. Washington, DC: World Bank.
CHAPTER 3
Introduction
How did a small, unremarkable Central American country with a turbu-
lent political past (and, indeed, present) manage to become a leading
exporter of clothing and apparel to the United States and, in doing so,
create in excess of 100,000 new jobs? Although not without peers in the
region, Honduras has achieved notable success with its free zones. The
Honduran free zone/maquila program was established as early as 1976;
however, it was not until the 1990s that it reaped dividends for the
economy, as a confluence of factors, including external political events
and economic trends, government policies, and a dynamic private sector,
enabled the country to attract large-scale FDI and become a location of
choice for offshoring in the U.S. apparel sector.
Over the last two decades, the free zone industry has expanded rapidly
in terms of investment, exports, and employment. However, the global
economic downturn began to affect the sector in the second half of 2008.
By mid-2009, the poor economy resulted in sizeable layoffs and some
companies closing down their operations in Honduras. The global eco-
nomic crisis has exposed possible weaknesses in the competitive position
of the traditional labor-intensive processing activities on which Honduras’
free zones have relied and highlighted the urgency of diversification.
47
48 Special Economic Zones
In facing this challenge, Honduras can draw on many of the strengths that
allowed it to build a successful free zone export sector. Some of these
same factors also may be a source of “lock-in” that prevents the govern-
ment and the free zone sector from making the decisions necessary to
achieve diversification and upgrading in the sector.
This chapter analyzes Honduras’ experience with free zones over the
past three decades. It discusses the factors that contributed to its success
and the key challenges the industry faces today.
Performance
Honduras has experienced rapid growth in the free zone program, par-
ticularly in the period from the early 1990s through 2007. This section
provides a brief summary of progress of the zones program across the
main components of performance: firms and investment, exports,
employment, and local market linkages.
Box 3.1
Employment
The main objective of the government’s free zone policy is employment
creation—in this regard, the program has been quite successful. In 2007,
employment in the free zone industry reached 134,000 workers; up by
3 percent year on year in 2005 and 2006. Seventy-seven percent of the
workers were employed in the textiles and clothing sector. The only other
product category with more than 3,500 employees was “car parts and
wire harnesses” for vehicles, which accounted for about 10 percent of free
zone employment (13,600).
Figure 3.1 illustrates the development of employment in the free
zones since 1995. The figure indicates that rapid growth of employment
took place mainly in the 1990s. Following recent declines, however, the
estimated employment in 2008 was only 15 percent higher (114,000)
than employment 10 years earlier (99,000). This is partly a result of
capital deepening and increases in productivity—important factors to
stay competitive and to move up the value chain—since exports have
increased more rapidly over the same period (see WTO 2003). But it also
reflects declining competitiveness in the labor-intensive assembly activities
140,000
# workers employed in SEZs
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Sources: WTO (2003) for 1995–2001; Asociación Hondureña de Maquiladores (2009) for 2002–08.
54 Special Economic Zones
that traditionally have been at the heart of the maquila program. Thus,
although the free zone policy generally has been a success, free zones may
have limited scope to absorb more than a small share of the growing labor
market in the future.
In 2007, 169 textiles and clothing companies were based in the free
zones, but a small handful of MNCs accounted for the majority of the
103,377 workers in the sector. Canadian company Gildan, which assem-
bles a wide range of products, including socks, fleece products, and knit
products such as T-shirts and underwear across several factories, is the
largest employer in the Honduran free zones. Gildan, along with U.S.
multinationals, such as Fruit of the Loom and Hanes, each employs more
than 10,000 workers.
Basin Initiative (CBI) was initiated by U.S. President Ronald Reagan and
came into effect on January 1, 1984, as a unilateral and temporary pro-
gram. It offered preferential market access to several countries in Central
America and the Caribbean for exports of clothing and apparel to the
United States. It was part of U.S. policy to combat political movements
through aid and trade. With CBI in place, Honduran producers did not
have to pay duties on reexported inputs, such as textiles and fabrics, of
U.S. origin, but only on local value added. In 1990, the U.S. passed the
Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Expansion Act (CBI II), which
made the incentives in the CBI permanent. Thus, in the period from the
late 1980s into the early 1990s, when the legal framework was fine-tuned
to facilitate investment in industrial parks and to attract FDI, the devel-
opment of preferential trade agreements was also working strongly in
Honduras’ favor.
The impact of CBI-induced trade preferences was reduced signifi-
cantly following the passing of the North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA) in 1994. Mexico was a major competitor in the clothing and
apparel sector, and the implementation of NAFTA offered Mexican pro-
ducers new preferences to the U.S. market in relation to Honduran pro-
ducers. However, in 2000, the U.S. passed the CBTPA, which provided
renewed trade preferences for Honduras’ producers. In particular, the
CBTPA extended preferential tariff treatment to textile products assem-
bled from U.S. fabric that previously had been excluded from the CBI.
This boosted the use of local content in the production value chain and
resulted in significant investment in textile mills in Honduras. According
to the Maquila Association of Honduras, CBTPA shifted the incentive
structure from the previously preferred solution of importing all input
material from the United States to using locally produced input material.
Today, roughly 60 percent of inputs are produced in Honduras, although
most of the intermediary goods used in the production process are pro-
duced in the domestic free zone environment. This production used to be
less than 10 percent in the 1980s and parts of the 1990s.
On April 1, 2006, Honduras ratified and implemented DR-CAFTA,
which covers the Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala,
Honduras, Nicaragua, and the United States.4 DR-CAFTA provides addi-
tional trade preferences to Honduran producers, although in this case the
rules of origin clause in the agreement led to mixed results for Honduran
producers of clothing and apparel. Rules of origin are applied to dis-
criminate between suppliers, and DR-CAFTA favors U.S. producers of
fabrics to suppliers from cost-effective producers in Asia. These rules of
Success and Stasis in Honduras’ Free Zones 57
Box 3.2
Box 3.3
a result, for those who can (many cannot) borrowing from abroad is the
favored option. Second, on January 1, 2009, the national minimum wage
was raised by 60 percent to 5,500 lempira (US$297). Although the free
zone industry managed to negotiate an exemption from this raise, it still
increased the cost of many of the goods and services in the production
supply chain.
Third, Honduras’ growing crime—fueled in part by a squeeze on orga-
nized crime in Colombia and Mexico and the subsequent migration of
criminal elements to the region—is scaring off some investors and adding
security costs to company operations. For example, security personnel
need to protect the factories and the zones, all workers are screened to
ensure that criminal gangs do not infiltrate businesses, and containers
need to be protected during transportation.
Finally, international competition, especially from China, is increasing
the pressure on free zone companies to make more use of technology and
raise labor productivity. The big dislocation of textiles and clothing pro-
duction from the United States to Latin America and the Caribbean that
took place in the 1990s is to a large extent complete. North American
clients are now benchmarking their production matrixes in Latin America
with those in Asia. Consequently, Honduras is facing competition from
China and Bangladesh rather than Atlanta, North Carolina, or Mexico.
And the requests by foreign investors are increasing. Twenty years ago,
they would be pleased with the cost of labor, the proximity to the U.S.
market, and the services offered in the port. Today, as one zone operator
put it, “they ask if the country has global ambition; if we have FTAs with
other countries; about the sources, cost and reliability of electricity; how
many training centers we have; the level of expertise, etc., because
Honduras is not so inexpensive anymore.”
Employers in the free zones have responded by attempting to address
productivity through increased training and incentives like production-
linked bonus schemes, free breakfast and dinner for workers who arrive
early to the factory or leave late, childcare provided on weekends, and so
on. But while improving productivity with the help of capital, technology,
and incentives is reducing the demand for labor, this improvement may
be somewhat at odds with the government’s main objective of employ-
ment creation through the free zone program.
Although productivity increases certainly are required, in light of the
challenges the free zone sector is facing, it is clear that a competitive posi-
tion based on low-cost production of garments (and wire harnesses) for
sale to the U.S. market, is unlikely to be sustainable. Therefore, the
Success and Stasis in Honduras’ Free Zones 63
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006* 2007*
textiles and clothing car parts and wire harnesses
other manufacturing industry food products
tobaco products other industry
of underwear and T-shirts for the U.S. market, but it is not one of the
10 leading producers of nylon production. Tariffs are lower for the former
two products, but they have not taken advantage of the tariff preferences
they enjoy in the U.S. market. Additionally, agriculture, fishery, and
tobacco processing activities exist in some free zones, but these are rela-
tively small businesses. The Atlantic Coast is processing fruits and the
Pacific Coast hosts shrimp and melon farms. Currently, interest seems to
be high in the export potential of call center services. Some zone opera-
tors are assessing the requirements to attract foreign call center compa-
nies. As of May 2009, however, no call center company had yet located
to Honduras.
One critical factor in the challenge of diversification is the need to
upgrade the skills of the free zone workforce. The traditional garment
assembly operations, however, historically have provided only minimum
training and skills development. The maquilas have worked in PPPs to
develop vocational training for maquila workers. But, in general, maquila
workers are relatively low skilled and possess limited formal education
(see box 3.4 for an initiative to address vocational training).
Despite the significant success of domestic investors in the free zone
sector, and the critical role played by the effective interaction between
the government and the private sector, they may also be a source of
lock-in, limiting the scale and speed by which the necessary processes of
adjustment take place. One reason for this limitation is that the majority
of free zone developers and operators in Honduras are not real estate
developers, but rather they have direct interests in the textiles and gar-
ment manufacturing sector. As such, their primary interest tends to be on
salvaging competitiveness in their traditional activities, rather than per-
haps focusing on attracting more diversified tenants into their zones.
More broadly, the privileges enjoyed by the free zone sector can be a
powerful disincentive to reform. For example, in the 1980s and early
1990, the Honduran government offered exchange rate convertibility in
the free zones. This policy is likely to have accelerated the devaluation
of the Honduran lempira. The government faced increased pressure
from the free zone industry to provide greater exchange rate incentives.
This led to a macroeconomic distortion, which is likely to have under-
mined the currency. Indeed, while the government of Honduras at times
has been open to reforming the legal framework to better suit local and
foreign market conditions, it has not strategically leveraged the free zone
policy for more comprehensive policy reform that could benefit all
investors and entrepreneurs.
Success and Stasis in Honduras’ Free Zones 65
Box 3.4
Conclusion
Honduras has more than three decades of experience of hosting free
zones. It took approximately a decade and a half following the enactment
of the Free Zone Law in 1976 before the policy had a significant eco-
nomic impact. In addition to U.S. demand, the key to takeoff in the early
66 Special Economic Zones
1990s was the fact that all the crucial conditions with regard to infra-
structure, free zone policy, trade policy, and committed domestic inves-
tors were in place. When foreign MNCs started to shift their assembly
lines to Honduras, the small Central American republic with its turbulent
political past (and present) quickly developed into a leading exporter of
textiles and clothing products to the United States.
Over the course of 22 years, the Honduran government enacted sev-
eral pieces of new legislation that broadened the geographic reach of the
free zone policy to finally cover the entire country. The government
learned from its early mistakes: for example, the implicit discrimination
against domestic manufacturers up until the enactment of the EPZ Law
reduced domestic investors’ interest in developing the local free zone
environment and consequently had a discouraging effect on foreign inves-
tors. In more recent years, manufacturers have suffered from the unfavor-
able macroeconomic climate and the difficult security situation, which
raise the cost of capital and risk of doing business.
The country has gotten many things right. The in-house customs solu-
tion is a widely lauded PPP that is expedient and efficient. The profes-
sionally managed Puerto Cortés has been crucial to the competitiveness
of the free zone industry. The zone operators’ decision to differentiate
their free zones from other free zones in the region by investing in quality
infrastructure and focus on providing high-quality services appears to
have been the right strategy. Foreign anchor investments helped signal to
foreign investors that Honduras was a potentially attractive supply base
of clothing for the U.S. market. A professional trade and investment pro-
motion agency also plays a seemingly important role.
Honduras has been fairly successful at developing backward linkages.
The lesson for small economies is that the design of the rules of origin in
trade agreements may have a huge impact on the country’s ability to
sustainably integrate new industries into the domestic economy. Honduras
benefited greatly from preferential market access to the United States
extended first in the CBI and later in DR-CAFTA. The rules of origin
incorporated in these agreements, however, had a huge impact on the
types of textiles and clothing product categories the country exports: at
times, the rules have had a negative effect, and at other times, they have
had a positive effect.
Despite the success of the free zones program, it remains highly con-
centrated in terms of exported product categories and geographic cover-
age of the zones. The government’s selective geographic expansion of free
zone policy did not have any significant effect, and the zone operators
Success and Stasis in Honduras’ Free Zones 67
Notes
1. The term maquiladora derives from the practice of millers charging a maquila
(“miller’s portion”) to process other people’s grain. This chapter uses the
terms maquila and free zone interchangeably.
2. Law Establishing the Free Zone of Puerto Cortés (Ley Constitutiva de la Zona
Libre de Puerto Cortés, Decree No. 356).
3. On some rare occasions, the government has provided fiscal incentives linked
to training to specific companies. For example, Lear Corporation received
some fiscal incentives to train 100 employees.
4. In addition, Honduras has signed trade treaties with Mexico and currently is
in the process of negotiating preferential tariff arrangements (PTAs) with
Chile, Colombia, the European Union, Panama, Taiwan, China, and Canada.
68 Special Economic Zones
References
Asociación Hondureña de Maquiladores. 2009. “Honduras: Analisis del
Comportamiento de la Industria Maquiladora Periodo 2000–2009.” Power
Point presentation, San Pedro Sula, May 2009.
Central Bank of Honduras. 2007. “Actividad Maquiladora en Honduras Año
2006 y Expectativas Para el Año 2007.” Subgerencia de Estudios Económicos,
August.
Central Bank of Honduras. 2008. “Actividad Económica de la Industria de
Bienes Para Transformación (Maquila) y Actividades Conexas en Honduras,
2000–2007 y Expectativas 2008.” Subgerencia de Estudios Economicos,
September.
EIU (Economist Intelligence Unit). 2008. “Country Commerce: El Salvador,
Guatemala, Honduras,” June. London: Economist Intelligence Unit.
MSN (Maquila Solidarity Network). 2005. “Honduras: The Gildan Story.”
Toronto: Maquila Solidarity Network.
World Bank. 2009. Doing Business 2010: Country Profile for Honduras, Comparing
Regulation in 183 Economies. Washington, DC: World Bank. www.doingbusiness
.org/ExploreEconomies/?economyid=86
WTO (World Trade Organization). 2003. “Trade Policy Review Honduras.”
Report by the Secretariat, WT/TPR/S/120, August 29. Geneva: World Trade
Organization.
CHAPTER 4
69
70 Special Economic Zones
Background
China’s efforts to attract foreign investment relied at first on SEZs. In
1979, four SEZs were established in the southeastern coastal region of
the country (a fifth zone was later added on Hainan Island). These were
patterned after similar zones established in Taiwan, China; the Republic
of Korea; Singapore; and Hong Kong, China. In 1984, 14 Chinese coastal
cities set up industrial and technological development zones, many of
which nurtured clusters targeting a particular industry. More than a hun-
dred zones of various kinds now have been established around the coun-
try, offering low taxes2 and infrastructure at international standards. These
zones have become one of the principle means by which the Chinese
government, at the local, provincial, and national levels, provides prefer-
ential policies to foster the development of technology and industry.
China has some experience with international partnerships in the
development of these zones. In 1983, the Japanese government helped
develop a master plan for the port of Qingdao, and in the early 1990s,
Japan’s International Cooperation Agency (JICA) provided foreign aid for
the Jiaozhou Bay Highway, a railway, and a sewage treatment plant, all
connected to the Qingdao Economic Development Zone. In 1993 and
1994, the Jiangsu province cities of Wuxi and Suzhou developed indus-
trial parks with Singaporean partners to learn from Singapore’s model.
These zones were run on a commercial basis, as joint ventures. The
Singaporean interests held majority shares, and took the lead in develop-
ing and marketing the zones until around 2001–02 when the capital and
management were restructured and Chinese interests became the major
shareholders and decision makers in both zones. The Chinese government
closely followed this process: the Suzhou zone even had a vice premier
as chairman of its board. In recent years, several Chinese development
zones have invited institutes from the U.S., Japan, Australia and U.K. to
participate in planning.
In the mid-1990s, after nearly 20 years of “bringing in” (yin jinlai)
foreign investment, technology, and skills, the Chinese government began
to emphasize “going out” (zou chuqu) or “going global.” Going global
involved finding new markets for Chinese goods and services, building up
Chinese brand names, and ratcheting up China’s own foreign investment.
In an experimental fashion, the Chinese government and Chinese com-
panies began to establish overseas industrial and trade zones, as early as
1998. In 2006, a policy decision was made to establish up to 50 special
economic cooperation zones in other countries as a central vehicle for
this aim.
China’s Investment in Special Economic Zones in Africa 71
Objectives
Overseas economic zones were believed to meet several strategic objec-
tives. First, they would increase demand for Chinese-made machinery
and equipment, while making it easier to provide postsales product sup-
port. Second, by producing overseas and exporting to Europe or North
America, Chinese companies would be able to avoid trade frictions and
barriers imposed on exports from China. Third, the zones would assist
China’s efforts to boost its own domestic restructuring and move up the
value chain at home.3 Fourth, they were intended to create economies
of scale for overseas investment, and in particular, to assist less experi-
enced small and midsize enterprises to venture overseas “in groups.”
Finally, fifth, they were viewed as a way to transfer one element of
China’s own success to other developing countries, a strategy that the
government believed would be helpful for recipient countries, while also
benefiting China. These multiple objectives mean that Chinese compa-
nies also have a variety of objectives in constructing and investing in
these zones. Indeed, evidence from the zone in Egypt, which is the most
advanced of the projects, supports the perspective that companies
investing in the Chinese zones are not following one model. Some
Chinese manufacturers in the zone are producing for the European mar-
ket (garments), others are serving the Egyptian market (oil rig assembly,
women’s sanitary products), and yet others are exporting back to China
(marble).
in 1999, the giant Chinese appliance firm Haier built its first industrial
complex outside of China: a 46-hectare industrial park in South Carolina,
United States. Fujian Huaqiao Company built an industrial and trade
zone in Cuba in 2000. In 2001, Haier and a Pakistani company, Panapak
Electronics, constructed a joint industrial park near the Pakistani city of
Lahore. A Chinese company began to implement an industrial zone in
the Chambishi area of Zambia in 2003. In 2004, China Middle East
Investment and Trade Promotion Center and Jebel Ali Free Trade Zone
constructed a US$300 million trade center, designed to host 4,000
Chinese companies in Dubai. Similarly, also in 2004, Tianjin Port Free
Trade Zone Investment Company and the United States Pacific
Development Company set up a Chinese trade and industrial park in the
South Carolina city of Greenville.
Thus, the decision to establish overseas zones as a part of the going
global policies was made after Chinese companies already had set up
industrial and trade zones overseas. China’s Ministry of Commerce and
the National Development and Reform Commission studied the experi-
ence of these companies in formulating the policies of support.
copper mine, copper smelters, a sulfuric acid plant, and a foundry, for a
total investment of US$760 million.
CNMC’s Lusaka subzone project, adjacent to the Lusaka airport, was
launched, at least symbolically, in January 2009. The zone is planned to
have an area of 5 square kilometers. A master plan for the zone is
expected to be completed by the end of 2009, with construction slated
to begin in 2010. Although the focus of the zone remains to be deter-
mined, CNMC has indicated a wish to focus on services (hotels, a confer-
ence center), light industries such as food and tobacco processing, and
assembly of home appliances and electronics. The strategic purpose of the
Lusaka subzone may be to diversify out of resource-intensive investment
as well as to accommodate the Zambian government’s desire for urban
employment opportunities. China Development Bank has set up a
Zambia team to provide funding support for the zones and CNMC
activities in Zambia. The Chambishi and Lusaka zones were the first of
five Multi-Facility Economic Zones (MFEZs) planned by Zambia.
Malaysian interests are also constructing an MFEZ near Lusaka, with
technical assistance from JICA.
Egypt Suez Economic and Trade Cooperation Zone. Egypt Suez Economic
and Trade Cooperation Zone is located in Sector 3 of the North-West
Suez Canal Economic Area just outside Egypt’s new deep-water Sokhna
Port, just below the southern entrance of the Suez Canal, 120 kilometers
from Cairo. It is being developed by Egypt TEDA Investment Co., a joint
venture between Tianjin Economic-Technological Development Area
(TEDA) Investment Holdings, Egyptian interests, and the China-Africa
Development Fund. The Suez project has a long and complicated history
(see box 4.1). Discussions on a transfer of China’s experience were initi-
ated by Egypt in 1994. TEDA Investment Holdings was tasked by Beijing
to set up a zone project in the Suez area in 1998. A joint consortium,
Egypt-Chinese Corporation for Investment (ECCI), was set up to imple-
ment this initial project. TEDA relied on the experience of their Egyptian
partners to learn how to operate in Egypt. The venture began long before
the area infrastructure was complete and the initial years were not very
successful, but with time a number of companies have set up operations
in Sector 3 of the zone.
In November 2007, TEDA participated in the second tender of
MOFCOM for overseas zones. After winning the bid, they bought addi-
tional land in Sector 3 of the zone and formed a new joint venture with
Egyptian interests. The zone builds on the earlier investment and will be
China’s Investment in Special Economic Zones in Africa 75
Box 4.1
2009 March. Chinese-Egypt TEDA wins Egyptian tender for SEZ development in
North-West Suez.
2009 July 17. TEDA and Egyptian government sign contract to develop part of
Sector 3 in North-West Suez as an SEZ. TEDA will invest US$280 million for
infrastructure within zone.
2009 November. Chinese and Egyptian premiers presided at the opening cer-
emony of the North-West Suez Special Economic Zone in Sector 3.
Source: Authors.
Nigeria Lekki Free Trade Zone. The Lekki Free Trade Zone (LFTZ) is
located 60 kilometers east of Lagos alongside a new planned deepwater
port. The project is a joint venture between a consortium of four
Chinese companies and Nigerian interests, including the Lagos state
government. The government of Lagos state provided 165 square
kilometers (16,500 hectares) of land—of which 30 square kilometers
(3,000 hectares) has been officially transferred to the joint venture so
far—and the right to a 50-year franchise. CADF also will provide equity
finance, and a proposal to include CADF on the board of directors still
is under negotiation.
The project was initiated in 2003 by China Civil Engineering
Construction Corp. (CCECC), which has been operating in Nigeria for
more than a decade. In March 2006, a Chinese consortium, CCECC-
Beiya (“Beyond”), was set up in Beijing. In May 2006, the consortium
partnered with Nigerians to establish the LFTZ Development Co. In
November 2007, the Lekki zone won support in the second MOFCOM
tender.
The development of the initial 3,000 hectares is divided into three
phases. The first phase (1,000 hectares) is the official China-Nigeria
Economic and Trade Cooperation Zone. Construction on these 1,000
hectares (designed to support 200 companies) began in October 2007.
An investment of approximately US$267 million is planned for the first
three years and the total investment is estimated around US$369 million.
The zone will be divided into six sections: (1) transportation equipment,
(2) textile and light industry, (3) home appliances and communication,
(4) warehousing, (5) export processing, and (6) living and business.
According to an interview with a Beijing representative of CCECC-Beiya
(2009), this first phase will serve only or mainly Chinese companies.
China’s Investment in Special Economic Zones in Africa 79
Sources from the Nigerian partner, however, indicate that the zone is
open to all investors, and the list of investors that have signed MOUs
includes mainly non-Chinese companies. An initial group of companies
(all Chinese) was expected to begin construction in March 2009. In inter-
views management indicated this was expected to be delayed until early
2010; however, this timeline has also slipped.
(about US$2 billion) for at least the two previous years. This was an effort
to ensure that companies would have the resources to successfully
finance the development of the zones, with the Chinese government
playing only a supportive role. More than 50 companies applied in the
second round, 20 of which were invited to submit formal proposals, with
11 proposals finally selected. At least two of the losing proposals were
located in Africa, including the Guoji Industrial Zone in Sierra Leone, and
the Nigerian industrial estate proposed by Ningbo CSI (Zhongce) Power
and Machinery Group and Nigeria Lishi Group.
2009 that it would establish two new programs. First, as part of the
Action Plan for 2010–2012, the Chinese would assist African SMEs to
invest in the zones. Second, a fund of US$1 billion will be set up for
African SMEs. It is not yet clear how they will be carried out.
The zones vary with regard to the regime for Chinese labor during
construction and operating phases. Most of the zones for which informa-
tion exists state that local laws on the use of expatriate labor apply. Because
only two of the zones have begun to operate (Egypt and Zambia), it is
not possible to determine the degree to which this is actually the case. In
these two zones, the workforce of the companies operating in the zones
is primarily local; however, it does appear that a relatively large percent-
age of Chinese are employed during the construction and start-up phases
in most of the projects. In Egypt, there is a clear national regime for for-
eign labor: one foreign employee is allowed for every nine Egyptians
employed. The first stage of the TEDA zone has more than 1,800 local
workers and (an informal estimate) about 80 Chinese staff, putting the
share of Chinese workers at below 5 percent. The general contractor for
the zone is an Egyptian company and some of the construction work was
subcontracted to local Egyptian companies. In Zambia’s MFEZ, approxi-
mately 400 Chinese and 500 Zambians were employed during the early
phase of construction, machinery installation, and training, putting the
Chinese share of employment at 45 percent. At present, with the instal-
lation and commissioning of specialized machinery at many of the facto-
ries, the percentage of Chinese employees is in flux. In the Chambishi
Zone as a whole (including the mines), in late 2009, there were approxi-
mately 700 Chinese and 3,300 Zambians (Haglund 2009). CNMC’s
already commissioned factories have an average of two Chinese to every
eight Zambians (25 percent Chinese workforce).
Information on the use of local and Chinese labor in other zones is
patchy and is available only for the construction phase. According to
Chinese sources, the first phase of construction of the Lekki Zone ini-
tially employed more than 50 engineers from China and 100 Nigerian
workers. Chinese partners state that the project currently has a ratio of
20 Chinese to 80 Nigerians.12 Nigerian officials confirm that informal
agreements have increased the number of Nigerians employed, particu-
larly from the project-affected community.13 In Mauritius, the construc-
tion phase of JinFei began only in September 2009, so it is early to assess
the situation. Overall, Mauritius has the most open approach to Chinese
workers among the six countries. During the first phase of construction,
60–65 percent of the workers reportedly have been Chinese (Minister
China’s Investment in Special Economic Zones in Africa 91
10 years or more, but several factors may explain the slow start. One is
the global economic crisis and, perhaps more broadly, challenges of
obtaining financing. The developers of the zones in Ethiopia and Mauritius
encountered serious problems at home, which were related to the finan-
cial crisis. These problems required substantial modification of their plans.
Both developers, however, have begun construction. Likewise, the main
company developing the Ogun Zone, Xinguang International, has run
into financial constraints at home, slowing progress on the zone.
The (in)experience of some of the developers has been a contributing
cause of uneven progress. The Zambia Chambishi Zone already had a
copper mine, copper smelters, sulfuric acid plant, and foundry before
2006. In Egypt, TEDA has been developing an experimental zone for
nearly 10 years and knew the market and environment. For both, the
inclusion into the MOFCOM program simply facilitated their expansion.
On the contrary, developers for the Ethiopia and Algeria zones had no
experience investing in those countries, and their plans were possibly less
realistic. In Ethiopia at least, tested by the economic crisis, revised plans
now account for such factors as the exchange rate, the need to plan for
foreign exchange shortages, and, relatedly, risk diversification. Whereas
the zone initially was going to focus in part on construction materials and
the production of steel, the developers may add nonferrous metal mining
to generate foreign exchange and diversify risks.
Another problem in some zones has been the failure to deliver a
world-class investment environment. For example, in Egypt during the
first years of the TEDA participation, a gap existed between the promised
services, facilities, and other benefits and the reality of what was offered.
Over time, the Egyptian government was able to fulfill most of its prom-
ises, but enterprises, understandably, do not want their investments to rest
on promises. Egypt still has not been able to ensure a permanent supply
of adequate water to the Suez Zone, for example. The greater Lekki pen-
insula is slated to get a new airport and port, the latter of which is critical
to the competitive offering of the LFTZ, but progress has been slow.
Finally, several zones are located at some distance from a large city.
Enterprises in the zones sometimes find it difficult to employ qualified
workers and arrange their daily commute. Chinese promotional activities
so far mainly target Chinese companies, often companies in their own
province, which limits the sources of possible investment and can hamper
the benefits clustering provides for the transfer of technology between
firms (local personnel still can be a vehicle for transfer, however, if hired
at a high enough skill level, which is another challenge).
China’s Investment in Special Economic Zones in Africa 93
Box 4.2
zones is that investor interest has come primarily from Chinese companies.
Thus, in the absence of proactive efforts to promote integration, Chinese
enclave zones are a real risk.
Despite these risks and the challenges experienced to date, these zones
have the potential to deliver benefits to both parties. Benefits for African
economies should include those associated with foreign investment more
generally: employment, transfer of more advanced technologies, spin-offs
to local firms and foreign exchange earnings from exports. The more
African firms invest in the zones, the greater the opportunity for technol-
ogy transfers and spin-offs, although technical skills also can be taught on
the job to African employees of Chinese firms. Furthermore, the zones
should contribute to the government revenue, at least moderately. For
Chinese enterprises, benefits include the reduction in transport costs
from being closer to African or European markets, lower labor costs in
some cases, cluster economies, as well as the discussed incentives. Chinese
zone developers expect to profit from the increased value of the land,
fees, and rents. Some (Lekki, Mauritius) have planned extensive residen-
tial, commercial, and entertainment areas, making the zones multiuse.
Maximizing Benefits
The partnership to develop SEZs is part of a long-term process of strate-
gic engagement between China and Africa. It offers a significant oppor-
tunity to contribute to job creation, industrialization, and poverty
reduction in the region. To fulfill this potential, however, the projects
must be successful from a business, social, and environmental perspec-
tive. This will require a partnership framework that includes the follow-
ing elements:
Country Zone
2006 Tender
1. Pakistan Haier-Ruba Home Appliance Industrial Zone
2. Zambia Chambishi Nonferrous Metal Mining Group Industrial Park
3. Thailand Luoyong Industrial Zone
4. Cambodia Taihu International Economic Cooperation Zone, Sihanouk
Harbour
5. Nigeria Guangdong Ogun Economic and Trade Cooperation Zone
6. Mauritius Tianli (now JinFei) Economic and Trade Cooperation Zone
Country Zone
7. Russian Federation St. Peterburg Baltic Economic and Trade Cooperation Zone
8. Russian Federation Ussuriysk Economic and Trade Cooperation Zone
2007 Tender
9. Republica Bolivariana Lacua Tech and Industrial
de Venezuela Trade Zone
10. Nigeria Lekki Free Trade Zone
11. Vietnam Chinese (Shenzhen) Economic and Trade Cooperation Zone
12. Vietnam Longjiang Economic and Trade Cooperation Zone
13. Mexico Ningbo Geely Industrial Economic and Trade Cooperation
Zone
14. Ethiopia Eastern/Orient Industrial Park, Jiangsu Qiyaan Investment
Group
15. Arab Republic of Egypt Tianjin TEDA Suez Economic and Trade Cooperation Zone
16. Algeria Chinese Jiangling Economic and Trade Cooperation Zone
17. Republic of Korea Chinese Industrial Zone
18. Indonesia Chinese Guangxi Economic and Trade Cooperation Zone
19. Russian Federation Tomsk Siberia Industrial and Trade Cooperation Zone
Source: Brautigam 2009, 315–16.
Notes
1. Some of this information has been published in Deborah Brautigam, The
Dragon’s Gift (Oxford University Press, 2009).
2. China introduced a new tax regime in 2008 that essentially did away with the
tax holidays that previously were offered in the SEZs and harmonized the tax
structures between SEZ and domestic firms. This new regime is in compliance
with the WTO.
3. As China prepared to join the WTO, policy makers sought ways to assist
Chinese firms to face the increased competition and inevitable restructuring
that trade liberalization would bring. Helping mature “sunset” industries to
move offshore, where they could be closer to their markets or raw materials,
would reduce costs and increase competitiveness. For example, Chinese com-
panies with high energy consumption and high labor intensity are especially
encouraged to invest in the Egypt zone (see Suez.TJCOC.gov.cn (2008)).
4. “Jiangxi Province plans to invest RMB 3.8 billion in Algeria” (2008).
5. The difference between the 19 zones chosen by tender, and the public goal of
10, allows for a comfortable margin. The Chinese government would prefer
to overshoot its goals, rather than come up short. In Africa, for example, the
official goal was announced in November 2006 as “three to five” zones by
2009. Seven actually were approved, and six were announced as under way
in November 2009 at the FOCAC meeting in Egypt.
98 Special Economic Zones
References
“Aerjiliya Xincuoshi jiang dui Woqiye Chukou he Touzi Chansheng Yingxiang”
[Algeria New Measures in Trade and Investment Will Affect Export and
Investment of Chinese Enterprises]. 2009, March 17. Commercial Office of
Chinese Embassy in Algeria. Available at http://dz.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/
jmxw/200903/20090306105852.html (accessed November 3, 2009).
Brautigam, Deborah. 2009. The Dragon’s Gift: The Real Story of China in Africa.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
CCECC-Beyond. 2008. Gongsi Xinwen [Corporation News]. Available at http://
www.cceccbeyond.com.cn/news-show.asp?ID=279 (accessed December 14,
2009).
“Dongfang Gongyeyuan, Kaipi Feizhou Taojinlu” [Oriental Industrial Park, Paving
Gold Path in Africa]. 2008, February 25. Zhangjianggang Daily. Available at
http://www.zjgxw.cn/html/tebieguanzhu/20080225/63110.html (accessed
December 14, 2009).
China’s Investment in Special Economic Zones in Africa 99
Interviews
Interview, Beijing Representative of CCECC-Beiya, Beijing, China, November 27,
2009.
Interview, Dar es Salaam, January 2008.
Interview, Lekki Chinese Consortium Office, Beijing, December 14, 2009.
Interview, Lekki Zone Representative, Beijing, November 27, 2009.
Interview, Lekki Worldwide Investments, Lagos, December 14 and 16, 2009.
Interview, Lekki Worldwide Investments, Lagos, Nigeria, December 14, 2009.
Interview, Lekki Worldwide Investment Officials, Lagos, Nigeria, December 14
and 16, 2009.
Interview, Ministry of Commerce Officials, Beijing, China, November 25, 2009.
Interview, Minister of Finance, Port Louis, Mauritius, July 2008.
Interviews, Oriental Industrial Park Management, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, June 15,
2009.
Interview, Vice Director of the Suez Teda Zone, Suez City, Egypt, June 9, 2009.
CHAPTER 5
Partnership Arrangements
in the China-Singapore (Suzhou)
Industrial Park: Lessons for Joint
Economic Zone Development
Min Zhao and Thomas Farole
Background
SEZs were established in China in the early 1980s as “demonstration
areas” to test policy reforms aimed at economic liberalization and to
attract foreign investment. SEZs have had a transformational effect in
building a competitive manufacturing sector in China and catalyzing its
economic development. They have played a significant role as a labora-
tory for economic reforms in the country and have been a major source
of technological learning to enable upgrading by local firms. During the
development of the SEZ program, the Chinese government made an
explicit effort to partner with foreign entities to learn about setting up
and managing modern industrial parks. One example of this approach
was the China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park, a modern industrial
township developed in the early 1990s. Although it faced many difficul-
ties in its early years, it has emerged as a major success, attracting US$17
billion in FDI and supporting more than 500,000 jobs.
101
102 Special Economic Zones
thrusts within its broad “regionalization strategy.” The aim of the initiative
was “to generate an external stream of revenue that would supplement
Singapore’s domestic economy” (Pereira 2007; Perry and Yeoh 2000). SIP
was an important vehicle to demonstrate that the Singapore model of
industrial parks could be transferrable (Inkepen and Pien 2006), thus
opening up a potential new industry for the country, delinked from the
physical constraints of its small market. Politically, SIP provided Singapore
with the opportunity to better understand an emerging China, and to
deepen relations with the country, through the various platforms set up
for interaction between both leaders and officials. To achieve these aims,
Singapore was particularly keen to work not just on a project with China
but in China. For this, SIP fit the bill perfectly. The project allowed
Singapore to share its development lessons comprehensively, including
how to plan, implement, and administer an entire integrated develop-
ment with industrial, housing, commercial, and recreational components
in “the Singapore way.” Although Singapore invested in other industrial
parks in the region, the economic and political importance of China gave
this project a high profile and strong government involvement.
Jointly, a key objective of SIP was that Singapore would share its
knowledge of efficient economic management and public administration
experience with its Chinese partner so that the latter could formulate
pro-business policies in SIP and could govern with transparency and effi-
ciency. With a benign business environment and good infrastructure, SIP
was expected to be competitive in attracting investment and generating
positive return to developers. But beyond this, both Singapore and
China’s leaders had a larger vision for SIP to be a model of reform and
innovation for other parts of China.
Partnership Structure
SIP was established with a multilevel governance structure, as illustrated
in figure 5.1. Overall governance of SIP is the responsibility of the China-
Singapore Joint Steering Council (JSC). The JSC was designed to meet
relatively infrequently (every 12–18 months) to review the progress,
resolve major implementation issues, and set future development goals.
The JSC is cochaired by the Chinese vice premier and the Singapore
deputy prime minister and includes ministerial chiefs of the two coun-
tries, senior officials of Jiangsu provincial and Suzhou municipal govern-
ments, and the head of Jurong Town Corporation (JTC). At a more
operational level, the Joint Working Committee, which was more active
106 Special Economic Zones
Adapting
Singapore Software
SIPAC
Experience Office Project Office
Main Developer:
China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park
Development Group Co. Ltd (CSSD)
during the start-up phase of the SIP, is cochaired by the mayor of Suzhou
and Singapore Ministry of Trade and Industry permanent secretary.
The Suzhou Industrial Park Administrative Committee (SIPAC) was
empowered by the Suzhou municipal government as an independent
local government authority to oversee SIP, which covers a total jurisdic-
tion of 288 square kilometers (of which 80 square kilometers belongs to
the China-Singapore cooperative zone1). The remaining area belongs to
three counties—Loufeng, Weiting, and Shengpu.2 SIPAC was granted
high autonomy in policy making and law enforcement. Currently, SIPAC
is also primary land developer of SIP.3
CSSD was initially the main land developer and still is a major real
estate developer and industrial property agent of SIP. CSSD is a joint
venture between China Suzhou Industrial Park Co., Ltd. (the Chinese
consortium) and Singapore-Suzhou Township Development Co., Ltd.
(the Singaporean consortium). The Chinese consortium is made up of
several large Chinese SOEs at national, provincial, and municipal levels.
The Singaporean consortium was composed of 24 companies, of which
10 are government-linked companies and statutory boards with total
share of about 42 percent of the Singaporean consortium (Straits Times,
January 15, 1998). From 1994 through 2000, CSSD was controlled
65 percent by the Singaporean consortium and 35 percent by the Chinese
China-Singapore (Suzhou) Industrial Park: Lessons for Joint Economic Zone 107
Shareholders Affiliates
The Hong Kong and China Gas Co., Ltd. Suzhou Singapore International School
CSSD
10%
Suzhou Industrial Park Power
Generation Co., Ltd.
CPG Corporation Pte Ltd. – 5%
China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial
Suzhou New District Hi-Tech Industrial Park Venture Co., Ltd.
Co., Ltd. – 5%
China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park
(SuQian) Development Co., Ltd.
Singapore Branch
Nantong Branch
Since SIP’s inception, more than 2,000 Chinese officials have attended
training conducted by the Singapore SPO.
To ensure the effectiveness of the knowledge transfer, officials that
attended training were required to report what they had learned.
Additionally, they drafted laws and regulations by adapting Singapore
practice to local conditions. So far, more than 100 regulations have been
enacted by adapting Singapore practice. Meanwhile, knowledge transfer
was reinforced through staff exchange. SIPAC sent staff to their
Singaporean counterpart and Singapore also sent staff to SIPAC and
CSSD to work for short-term periods. The rotation period was often
three months. These rotations helped SIPAC and Suzhou municipality to
build up public management capacity, as SIP strived to become a service-
oriented, transparent government providing full-day, complete process,
and all-round services to investors and residents.
In the process of SIP development, the Chinese side also learned by
doing. One example that received great recognition was urban planning.
Right before the construction of SIP and with the strong emphasis of
Singaporean side, experts from both China and Singapore drafted a
110 Special Economic Zones
that is, infrastructure investment in SIP was six times more intensive
(expensive) than in the other parts of the zone. As a result, the land was
expected to be sold or rented at a rate high enough to recover this devel-
opment cost.
For local government, which had only a minor share of the project, the
incentives were quite different. They cared less about commercial returns
and more about the social and economic returns, including job creation,
GDP, and perhaps most important, tax revenue. In China, local govern-
ment is responsible for the provision of most public goods and services,
and its main source of revenue is the value added tax paid by industrial
firms. Thus, the incentive for local government is to attract as many
industrial investors as possible, as quickly as possible. Land rents and
prices that are too high to attract industrial investors result in less tax
revenue and fewer jobs. Thus, there was a clear misalignment of incen-
tives between the Singaporean majority stakeholders and the local gov-
ernment. This misalignment was exacerbated by the fact that the central
government made a commitment in the initial project agreement to
allow SIP to keep all tax revenues generated in the zone. Thus, local gov-
ernment had no incentive to invest in the critical connecting infrastruc-
ture to SIP.
Perhaps the biggest source of difficulty in the partnership was the
fierce competition that arose in neighboring industrial parks. Before the
launch of SIP in 1994, Suzhou Administration already had four state-
level economic development zones—Suzhou New and Hi-Tech
Development Zone (located west of the old Suzhou city),6 Kunshan
Economic and Technological Development Zone (just 30 kilometers
away from SIP), Zhangjiagang Bonded Area, and Suzhou Taihu National
Tourism and Vacation Zone, as well as numerous provincial-level zones.
Except for the latter of these, all the zones targeted industrial investors.
As the other industrial parks were all government sponsored, land
developers in those industrial parks usually were SOEs. Their interests
naturally were aligned much more closely with local governments.
Attracting investors, rather than short- or medium-term commercial
returns, was tops on their agenda. Industrial land therefore was rented
to industrial investors at a subsidized rate, creating serious competition
for SIP and making it almost impossible to maintain rents at levels that
could deliver a commercial return.
Moreover, free-riding could hardly be avoided. As SIP is an open area,
roads built inside or connecting to SIP also could be used outside of SIP,
including in adjacent industrial zones. At the time SIP was attracting
112 Special Economic Zones
exports increased 10.3 times and SIP’s exports increased by 17.9 times,
although again from a low base (China Statistical Bureau 2008; SIP
Statistical Office 2009; Suzhou Statistical Bureau various years).
and foreign investors. Industrial land and factories were rented at a com-
petitive market rate, while commercial and residential land was auc-
tioned. Revenues from land sales were used to finance infrastructure
investment. Several state-owned corporations under the supervision of
SIPAC were established following the model of Temasek—some join
CSSD in land development and some manage state-owned properties.
The participation of these SOEs accelerated the pace of SIP develop-
ment. Although CSSD still plays an active role in the industrial land
development, it also has expanded its business areas to residential and
commercial estate development, property management, and the provi-
sion of other services.
The success of the partnership also can be attributed to the high-level
leadership attention accorded to the project by China and Singapore. The
Singapore government invested substantial resources into making the
project a success. In addition to committing many of its best officials to
spearhead the project,7 many Singapore government ministries and agen-
cies in charge of such areas as urban planning, water treatment, commu-
nity infrastructure, and social security actively provided knowledge
transfer to SIP officials, a commitment that continues into 2011.
The strong support from China’s central government extends to the
many policy incentives granted to SIP, which further sharpened SIP’s
competitive edge. SIP was awarded the same status as China’s five SEZs
and Shanghai’s Pudong New District at its inception in 1994. In addition
to the preferential policies enjoyed by the SEZs and Pudong, SIP also
enjoyed many other privileges of its own as a unique Singapore-China
cooperation project. For example, at the project’s inception in 1994, the
corporate tax in SIP was reduced to 15 percent from the usual 30 percent
for most parts of China. The local authority, SIPAC, also was authorized
to approve investments of any size with no upper limit on the total
amount of investment in SIP.8 Adopting Singapore’s experience of the
Central Provident Fund system, SIP developed the SIP Provident Fund
System (SPF), the only such regional scheme in China and perhaps the
most important preferential incentive offered at SIP. Based on prepay-
ment accumulation and personal account deposit, the system covers
social security items, such as pension, medical care insurance, unemploy-
ment insurance, employment injury insurance, maternity insurance, and a
housing fund. The contributions from enterprises or individuals to SPF all
go to a personal account and can be moved when employees leave SIP. In
contrast, the contribution from enterprises to pension funds is put into a
pool and is not portable when employees move to other provinces or
China-Singapore (Suzhou) Industrial Park: Lessons for Joint Economic Zone 115
Conclusion
As developing-country governments engage with China and other foreign
partners in large economic zone development projects, the experience of
China’s partnership with Singapore for SIP reveals a number of valuable
lessons. These are summarized in three main categories: (1) partnership
structure and governance; (2) planning, development, and operations;
and, possibly of most importance, (3) learning and knowledge sharing.
116 Special Economic Zones
Box 5.1
1997: SIP Weiting Customs Supervision Station was founded and became one of
the first three express inland ports in China.
2001 (January): SIP bonded zone for export processing (EPZ) was in operation.
Customs adopted an electronic customs declaration and supervision system to
manage enterprises in EPZ, where the Electronic Data Interchange system replaces
the use of the Processing Trade Logbook and Bank Deposit Account System.
Enterprises located in EPZ can enjoy additional preferential policies, including
duty exemption for construction materials, equipment, packing materials, con-
sumable materials, and a rational amount of office appliances. Other preferential
policies include exemption from value added tax on products produced in EPZ
and exemption from tariff quota and license control for cargos into and out of EPZ
to and from overseas (excluding restricted items), and a tax rebate on Chinese-
made raw materials, parts and components, packing materials, and construction
materials entering into EPZ.
2002: With the approval of State General Administration of Customs, the first
air-land transfer mode was introduced, making SIP a virtual airport. With the
Air-Land Transshipment Model, supervised warehouses of the Shanghai Airport
are extended directly to SIP, making import and export declaration possible at
the local customs—SIP Customs. This function realizes a one-stop service for
declaration, inspection, and dispatch, and it offers flexibility in the arrival, decla-
ration, inspection, and clearance of goods. The time required for getting through
customs procedures was greatly reduced from one to two days to seven to
eight hours, making it possible for local IT companies to control their produc-
tion cycle within five days.
2004: SIP Bonded Logistics Center (Type B) with a total planned area of three
square kilometers was founded. The Type B Bonded Logistics Center has the func-
tions of a “free trade port.” All imported goods entering the logistics park enjoy
“bonded” status. Goods entering the logistics park from within China can be
regarded as an export and enjoy a tax rebate.
2007: With the operation of a new land-air transfer mode, the virtual airport
finally realized the two-way direct transportation. This made SIP a unique vir-
tual port in China combining ocean, air, and land shipment, and allowed SIP to
handle customs declaration, inspection, and clearance of exports and imports
directly.
2008 (January): The SIP IFTZ (China’s first) was in operation by integrating the exist-
ing two EPZs, the Customs Bonded Logistic Center and Weiting Customs Check-
point. Within the planned area of 5.28 square kilometers, the IFTZ has the functions
of bonded logistics, bonded processing, international trade, and port operation.
Incoming foreign goods are under duty bond, incoming domestic goods enjoy
export duty refund, and all transactions of goods within the area are exempted
from VAT levies. Customs set up a dedicated office in the zone.
Source: Authors.
• Aligning incentives among key partners: The main challenges to the part-
nership arose in part because of the difficult balance of meeting both
commercial and political objectives. For these high-profile projects,
both objectives are critical. In the initial structure of the partnership
arrangement, however, incentives were not properly aligned to address
this balance. Although the flip in ownership and control of the project
was the high-profile part of the realignment of incentives, a number of
other important actions were taken to ensure that all stakeholders in-
volved had the incentive to work toward common goals.
“software transfer” program over the years. On the Chinese side, the
government not only put many officials through the training programs,
but also required those officials to demonstrate their acquired knowl-
edge on the job.
• Making use of practical exchanges: Formal training also has been embed-
ded at SIP through a long-running program of staff exchanges between
the partners.
1994 On February 26, the representatives from the governments of China and
Singapore signed the Agreement on Joint Development of Suzhou Indus-
trial Park.
On November 18, the master land plan for phase 1 was approved.
1996 CSSD company increased the total amount of investment to US$300 mil-
lion and increased the registered capital to US$100 million. The sharehold-
ing structure remained unchanged.
January 10, SIP bonded zone for export processing was in operation.
On October 28, the state-owned land-use right was auctioned for the
first time.
2002 CSSD completed the capital enlargement and injection in August 2005.
The registered capital was increased to US$125 million. Three new share-
holders were attracted: Hong Kong and China Gas Investment Ltd., CPG
Corporation Pte. Ltd., and Suzhou New District Hi-Tech Industrial Co., Ltd.
2007 In April, SIP became a pilot of National High and New Technology Zone.
2008 On January 15, the SIP Integrated Free Trade Zone (the first one in China)
was in operation and customs set up an office in the zone.
On June 29, CSSD joint stock company founding meeting was held and
the joint stock company was established on June 30.
Source: Authors.
Notes
1. This is equivalent to more than one-tenth of the total land area of
Singapore.
2. The initial cooperation area was 70 square kilometers and there were five
townships at the outset of SIP. Later the cooperation area was expanded
to 80 square kilometers and the five townships were combined into three
townships.
3. The 80-square-kilometer Cooperative Zone was designed to met the standard
of “Nine Utilities and Leveled Land” (the nine utilities being Roads, Power
Supply, Water Supply, Gas Supply, Steam Supply, Sewage System, Storm
Water Drainage, Telecommunication, Cable Television), meaning it was fully
prepared and serviced, ready for development of operating infrastructure.
4. Xinsu Industrial Development was set up to develop and operate ready-built
factories in the park. These are Temasek Holdings (US$4.14 million), JTC
International (US$16.54 million), Keppel Land (US$10.33 million), and
Sembawang Industrial (US$10.33 million). Three companies have additional
stakes in Gasin (Suzhou) Property Development Co. Ltd., a company set up
to develop residential property in the SIP: Temasek Holdings (US$4.23
China-Singapore (Suzhou) Industrial Park: Lessons for Joint Economic Zone 125
References
China Economic Development Zone Association. 2008. China Development Zones
Yearbook. Beijing: China Financial & Economic Publishing House.
China Statistical Bureau. 1992–2009. China Statistical Yearbook. Beijing: China
Statistic Press.
Deng, X. 2004. Selected Works of Deng Xiaoping, Volume 3. Beijing: People’s
Press.
Inkepen, A., and W. Pien. 2006. “An Examination of Collaboration and Knowledge
Transfer: China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park.” Journal of Management
Studies 43 (4): 779–811.
Pereira, A. 2007. “Transnational State Entrepreneurship? Assessing Singapore’s
Suzhou Industrial Park Project (1994–2004). Asia Pacific Viewpoint 48 (3):
287–98.
Perry, M., and C. Yeoh. 2000. “Singapore’s Overseas Industrial Parks.” Regional
Studies 34 (2): 199–206.
Singapore Ministry of Trade and Industry. 2010. “Reply to World Bank on China-
Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park.” Background note.
Singapore Straits Times, January 15, 1998. “Suzhou Park problems can be over-
come.” http://www.singapore-window.org/80115st1.htm.
Suzhou Statistical Bureau. 1995–2009. Suzhou Statistical Yearbook. Beijing: China
Statistical Press.
CHAPTER 6
Introduction
Paralleling the rapid development of SEZs in recent decades has been the
development of regional trade agreements (RTAs)1 to promote trade and
economic integration. As of February 2010, a total of 457 RTAs have been
notified to the WTO, out of which 266 are already in force. These num-
bers are expected to continue to rise.
SEZs and RTAs are policy tools that promote trade and investment of
countries and regions. When successful, SEZs generate significant local
employment, increase exports, and accelerate economic growth.
Meanwhile, successful RTAs contribute to increased trade among mem-
ber countries and promote regional integration more broadly. When the
two initiatives exist simultaneously, they have the potential to generate
significant synergies. Specifically, by lowering barriers to regional trade
and facilitating the potential for realizing scale economies in regional
production, RTAs stimulate investment by both domestic and foreign
firms. By providing serviced land, infrastructure, and an improved
127
128 Special Economic Zones
regulatory environment, SEZs lower the cost and risk to firms in under-
taking such investments. In addition, the growth of intraregional trade
may create opportunities for specialized zones, for example, focusing on
logistics or cross-border trade.
Although SEZs have the potential to facilitate regional synergies, RTAs
often face challenges in incorporating SEZs into their regulatory frame-
works. This is particularly true in the case of traditional EPZs. This chal-
lenge stems from the fact that although RTAs represent bilateral or
multilateral instruments, SEZs are, in all cases to date, instruments by
which an individual country promotes investment and exports, the for-
mer potentially in competition with their RTA partners. In particular,
when SEZ programs provide enterprises with tariff-related incentives,
they trigger various issues in the context of RTAs. For example, they
may create an incentive for “tariff-jumping”—that is, when a foreign
firm decides to jump over the tariff wall to avoid trade costs (tariffs).
This tariff-jumping might happen through investment of a physical
presence in a member country (the traditional definition of tariff-
jumping), although in this case, the investment would be in an SEZ and
not necessarily within the member country’s customs territory. But it also
might happen without any physical presence at all, by using the SEZ as a
bulwark to enter the customs territory. Specifically, because many SEZs
allow duty-free entrance of inputs imported from outside of a territory,
foreign (extra-RTA) goods could potentially enter the RTA free of duty
through an SEZ, and then leak into the customs territory of other RTA
member states. If a newly established RTA disallows exports from a mem-
ber country’s SEZ to the territory of other RTA member countries, how-
ever, the operation of existing SEZ investors may be affected substantially.
Consequently, this may necessitate a reform of SEZ programs in member
countries to prevent a large loss of investment. Furthermore, excluding
SEZ investors from taking advantage of the RTA prevents member coun-
tries from realizing the full potential of these two trade and investment-
generating instruments and achieving effective regional integration. To
leverage fully both of these policy tools, RTA member countries need to
take a collaborative approach to harmonize their SEZ programs.
Despite the growing significance of both SEZs and RTAs, research on
the connection between these two instruments of trade and investment
has been limited. In practice, most RTAs take measures to prevent tariff-
jumping through SEZs. Yet, few efforts have been made to harmonize
SEZ programs across member countries in some RTAs. Such collabora-
tion could generate considerable benefits by creating synergy between
SEZs in the Context of Regional Integration 129
SEZ and RTA and by acting as a step toward greater economic integra-
tion. This chapter aims to fill part of the research gap. In particular, the
objectives of this chapter are (1) to discuss the implication of RTAs on
SEZs and review experiences in various RTAs, including country-specific
cases; and (2) to outline the potential opportunities that a harmonized
approach toward SEZ initiatives might generate.
In the above framework, this chapter first reviews briefly the role,
trend, and impact of RTAs, with particular attention to those of Sub-
Saharan Africa. Then, after laying out various types of issues arising from
overlap of RTAs and SEZs with preferential tariff treatment, it reviews
how RTAs have been managing these issues and draws lessons from case
examples. Finally, it discusses how harmonizing SEZ programs, including
but not limited to duty-free imports and fiscal incentives, within RTA
member countries can help realize synergies between the two policy
instruments and contribute to greater trade and investment generation
and deeper economic integration.
40
transparency 37
mechanism 35
35
WTO 31
30 29
26
25
22 22
21
20 19 19
18
17
16
15
15 14 14
10 9
8
7 7
6 6 6
5
5 4 4
3 3 3 3
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0
49
51
53
55
57
59
61
63
65
67
69
71
73
75
77
79
81
83
85
87
89
91
93
95
97
99
01
03
05
07
09
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
Source: WTO Secretariat (2010).
131
132 Special Economic Zones
ECOWAS Qatar
Kuwait
Cape Verde Bahrain
Iraq
The Gambia UAE Oman
AGADIR Syria
Guinea Saudi Arabia
Lebanon
Sierra Leone WAEMU AMU Yemen GCC
PAFTA
Liberia Pal. Auth.
Mali
Ghana Niger Tunisia Jordan
Mauritania Morocco
Nigeria Burkina Faso Egypt
Senegal Algeria
Libya Sudan
Guinea Bissau
Benin Togo Chad Uganda
Central Afric. Rep. Ethiopia Kenya
Côte d’Ivoire EAC
Eritrea Rwanda
Equatorial Guinea
Comoros Burundi
Gabon Congo Djibouti
CEMAC
COMESA DR Congo Tanzania
Cameroon
Zambia
Zimbabwe
Malawi
Madagascar
Mauritius
Seychelles SADC
Namibia Swaziland Angola
Botswana Mozambique
Lesotho EFTA
SACU
SACU
EU MERCOSUR
South Africa
Why is it an Issue?
The issues arising from the coexistence of RTAs and SEZs relate to trade
triangulation, competitiveness of local producers, promotion of regional
economic integration, and competitive positioning. This section discusses
each of these in turn.3
SEZs in the Context of Regional Integration 135
Figure 6.3 Evolution of the Share of Intra-PTA Imports in Total Imports, 1970–2008
ASEAN CACM
30 20
25
15
20
percent
percent
15 19% 10
18%
10 17%
5
5 8%
0 0
70
73
76
79
82
85
88
91
94
97
00
03
2006
08
70
73
76
79
82
85
88
91
94
97
00
03
2006
08
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
COMESA ECOWAS
10 20
8
15
percent
percent
6
10
4 11%
5
2
39%
0 0
70
73
76
79
82
85
88
91
94
97
00
03
2006
08
70
73
76
79
82
85
88
91
94
97
00
03
2006
08
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
EU Mercosur
70 25
60
20
50 62% 62% 66% 64%
percent
percent
40 53% 15
30 10 14%
20
5
10
0 0
70
73
76
79
82
85
88
91
94
97
00
03
2006
08
70
73
76
79
82
85
88
91
94
97
00
03
20 6
08
0
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
NAFTA WAEMU/UEMOA
50 12
40 10
8 10%
percent
percent
30 39%
6
20
4
10 2
0 0
70
70
73
76
79
82
85
88
91
94
97
00
03
2006
08
73
76
79
82
85
88
91
94
97
00
03
2006
08
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
achieve this and how restrictive they are varies widely. Most RTAs do
so either by establishing a special rule on the treatment of products
processed in SEZs of RTA member countries or by applying rules of
origin that are generally applicable to products processed anywhere in
the RTA.
Special clause for SEZ-processed products. Many RTAs set out a special
clause to stipulate how the goods from SEZs in member countries should
be treated in the context of the RTA. Examples include the EAC customs
union and the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU, or
UEMOA from its French name). Many of these RTAs establish an article
to address specifically the entry of SEZ-processed products into the prin-
cipal protocol of trade or an additional protocol, although some unions
set a rule in the annexes of the trade agreement. The most stringent rule
takes the form of complete prohibition of the entry of products processed
under SEZ programs into the RTA territory. NAFTA is the only major
RTA that applies such stringent rules—this agreement was implemented
over a seven-year transitional period through 2001.
All other RTAs reviewed in this study that include a special clause
on SEZ-processed products stipulate that such products may not ben-
efit from the status as an originating product. Unlike rules of origin,
this rule usually applies regardless of the level of local content of
products. There are some variations in how RTAs define the products
subject to the special clause. Some RTAs refer to goods processed in
SEZs, whereas others describe these goods as goods processed under
special tariff regimes. None of the RTAs reviewed in this study refers
to whether the MFN status would apply to SEZ-processed products
that cannot benefit from the status as an originating product. Yet, in
practice, these products that do not carry a certificate of origin are
subject to normal tariff schedules.
Many RTAs, although not all, set up exceptions to this rule in various
dimensions. For example, some RTAs accept products processed in SEZs
as originating products if import duties are paid on the inputs of these
products. In Africa, WAEMU adopts this type of exception rule. WAEMU
also has a unique exception rule that SEZ-processed products can be
granted the status as an originating product if the import duties applied
on their inputs are greater than those that would be applied on finished
goods. Another type of exception, such as that in the RTA agreement
between Central America and the Dominican Republic, allows for the
entry of SEZ-processed products under the same terms as the host
SEZs in the Context of Regional Integration 139
country if the SEZ allows the entry of such products into their own
domestic market.
Rules of origin. Many RTAs that do not establish a specific clause for the
treatment of products from SEZs simply apply rules of origin. Rules of
origin is a standard and widely used method of avoiding trade deflection
or tariff-jumping in cases in which a product enters into the trade area
through a low or no-tariff member country to exploit the duty-free
nature of the RTA. To some extent, rules of origin can restrict the entrance
of SEZ-processed products because SEZ operators generally have a rela-
tively high import ratio and thus may not meet the rules-of-origin
requirement. Yet, when the local content requirement is sufficiently low,
SEZ operators still can benefit from both duty-free import (SEZ) and
duty-free access to a greater market (RTA). For example, COMESA
applies relatively loose rules of origin and it allows up to 60 percent of
extraterritory inputs.7 Under such a generous rule, many SEZ operators
may be able to take advantage of both SEZ and RTA, placing local pro-
ducers at disadvantage.8 Conversely, stringent rules of origin, such as
those proposed at the Southern African Development Community
(SADC) Free Trade Area, also can be problematic. When rules are too
strict, local producers are at a competitive disadvantage against foreign
producers because they are forced to purchase costly local inputs. In an
extreme case, foreign producers may be able to sell products at a cheaper
price than an RTA’s local producers, especially when external tariff rates
for finished goods are not so high (Flatters 2002).
No rule. Among those RTAs reviewed in this study, a few have neither a
special clause on SEZ-processed goods nor rules of origin. In most RTAs,
however, the SEZ issue has been raised as a concern. In such cases, either
a special clause or rules of origin or both are being discussed. These
include the agreement between Dominican Republic and the Caribbean
Community, in which case a special agreement on the treatment of prod-
ucts from free zones has been proposed. The proposed arrangements
include (1) products from SEZs must not enjoy additional advantages to
those they now enjoy in the different customs territories, and (2) they
must enjoy no less favorable treatment than what they now enjoy in
reciprocal trade (Granados 2003).
Figure 6.4 summarizes the classification of various tariff-related mea-
sures taken by RTAs discussed above. Appendix 6.B contains a list of how
various RTAs treat SEZ-processed goods.
140
Outcome Examples
Rules of origin?
No
Entry allowed as originating
CACM
products (or no rule)
Source: Author.
Note: AFTA = ASEAN Free Trade Area; CACM = Central American Common Market; COMESA = Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa; EAC = East African Community; ECOWAS =
Economic Community of West African States; GCC = ; Mercosur = Southern Common Market; NAFTA = North American Free Trade Agreement; SADC = Southern African Development
Community; UEMOA = West African Economic and Monetary Union.
SEZs in the Context of Regional Integration 141
Mexico. NAFTA, which came into force in January 1994, set a strict
prohibition on the entry of goods processed under SEZ schemes, within
a seven-year transitional period. At this same time, Mexico’s exports from
the maquila program had increased substantially, reaching 41 percent of
the country’s total exports and accounting for 1.3 million jobs by 1998.
With most products from maquila exported to the United States, it was
critical for the Mexican government to find a solution to comply with the
NAFTA requirement without dampening fast-growing industries. As a
part of the policy response, Mexico established the Sectoral Promotion
Program. This program grants registered companies MFN tariff prefer-
ences, which are 5 percent or less in most cases, on more than 5,000
inputs used in production. Companies engaged in specified industries9
are eligible to register for and benefit from this program. Critically, this
preferential tariff treatment is not contingent on export performance, and
it applies equally to exporters and to companies who sell to the domestic
market, thus ensuring that it is in compliance with NAFTA. This is a suc-
cessful case in which a country managed to comply with an RTA’s strin-
gent rule on export-based special incentives by shifting from an
export-oriented program to a sector-focused one (Granados 2003).
Kenya. The EAC customs union, which came into effect in 2005, clearly
excludes SEZ-processed goods from benefiting from the status as origi-
nating products. Among five member countries, only Kenya had the
potential to be affected immediately, because it is the only country that
had established a sizable SEZ program at the signing of the customs
union. Most current users of SEZs are not affected by Kenya’s integration
into EAC customs union either, because their major export destinations
are outside of the EAC (mainly to the United States and Europe). Thus,
Kenya’s SEZ program has not been forced to address reform, so far.
However, there is no guarantee that the impact will remain limited in the
future. Kenya’s full integration to EAC customs union is likely to change
the economic rationale of potential investors, leading to more invest-
ments targeting the large EAC market. Indeed, some investors in the
SEZs are already requesting Kenyan authority to loosen the current rule
that requires all SEZ firms to export at least 80 percent of their output
SEZs in the Context of Regional Integration 143
and allow them to sell more to the EAC market (Manchanda 2010). The
current request does not relate to the treatment of tariffs on finished
goods entering into EAC territory, but rather to the minimum export
requirement to reside in SEZ areas. However, once the SEZ tenants are
allowed to sell more to EAC territory, the question of the tariff on the
goods processed in the SEZ will undoubtedly arise as an issue among
EAC member countries.10
SADC. Although SADC does not set specific rules governing the entry
of SEZ-processed goods, it has proposed restrictive rules of origin, requir-
ing high local content for any import into the RTA territory to take
advantage of duty-free access. At the same time, however, some excep-
tions are granted to accommodate the circumstances of member coun-
tries and sectors. In particular, it allowed temporary special arrangements
for textiles and garments exports from Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania,
and Zambia to the partner countries of the Southern African Customs
Union (SACU) (Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, South Africa, and
Swaziland). This special arrangement, which expired in 2009, enabled the
manufacturers in the four countries to continue procuring fabrics from
outside SADC for duty-free sales to SADC, during which time the coun-
tries were expected to develop their local fabric-producing capacity. This
arrangement included all textiles and garments produced in SEZs. It pro-
vides an example in which an RTA flexibly adjusted its rules considering
the significance of the industry—in this case, textiles and garments—for
some member countries as well as the volume of its trade within the
region. Although the policy does not focus specifically on SEZs, a similar
approach could be taken, by which an RTA establishes a special arrange-
ment for SEZ-processed goods. This approach could be especially helpful
when a practical approach is necessary to allow member countries time
to adjust their national policies and to enable existing investors to restruc-
ture their business under the new RTA context.
• Harmonizing regulations
• Taking collective action to lower or remove financial incentives (e.g.,
general investment incentives)
• Establishing strategic frameworks as a region, such as the following:
° Joint marketing of region as investment destination
° Creation of industrial linkages among SEZs in RTA
° Specialization of SEZs based on comparative advantage relative to
other members in RTA
Regulatory Framework
Having simple, straightforward regulations helps a country to promote
investment by lowering investors’ costs of search and compliance. The
same logic applies to the SEZ-related regulations within an RTA. When
investors consider exploring a new market or opening a new production
site, they will research and compare the investment-related laws, includ-
ing SEZ regulations across all potential locations in a chosen region. They
are likely to assess various factors, including the existence and details of
the SEZ law, the requirements for establishing operations in the zone, the
fiscal and nonfiscal incentives available, how application and registration
processes are managed, and whether a competent zone authority has
been established. Having clear SEZ rules and consistent definitions of
terminologies across member countries reduces the search costs for inves-
tors, allowing them to focus more on strategic factors, such as target
customer base, suppliers, distribution network, and so on. More attractive
regulations, infrastructure, or incentives may help a country to win an
SEZs in the Context of Regional Integration 145
Financial Incentives
Different structures and levels of financial incentives among SEZs of
member countries pose further problems than simply adding search costs
for investors. First, differences often involve export-performance-based
conditions, which usually are incompatible with the RTA framework and
with the WTO rules. Second, when member countries compete for
investment by offering ever-greater financial incentives, they risk eroding
146 Special Economic Zones
their tax bases without necessarily attracting more investment than they
otherwise would—in effect, transferring rents directly to (usually multi-
national) investors.
Among various incentives, export-based incentives, a form of incen-
tives that most SEZs employ, are particularly problematic. As is clear
from the discussion in the previous section, export-based tariff-related
incentives prevent member countries from taking full advantage of
potential synergies between RTA and SEZ programs. Such incentives
motivate member countries to rule out the possibility of SEZ-processed
products enjoying RTA benefits or, in extreme cases, they prohibit the
entrance of such goods into the RTA territory altogether to prevent
tariff-jumping.
As is the case with regulatory harmonization, removing or unifying
financial incentives among member countries takes time, especially if
some member countries have established SEZ programs in which many
investors are already granted with permanent exemption or reduction of
tariffs or other taxes. Even if a country currently does not have financial
incentives for SEZ operators, it may feel pressure from potential and
existing investors to establish one, particularly if many of its neighbors
have them. Yet, the advantage of investment promotion through financial
incentives should be balanced with the potential loss of a tax base as well
as lost opportunities from synergies with RTAs. Also, by aligning the fac-
tors that are most evident and most frequently exposed to comparison
(i.e., quantifiable financial incentives), member countries can establish a
foundation on which they can move forward to discuss strategic develop-
ment and integration on equitable terms. To remove the most problem-
atic form of financial incentives based on export performance, countries
can learn from Mexico, which managed the participation in NAFTA by
shifting incentive programs away from export-based ones to those based
on other type of performances, such as investment amount or employ-
ment generation.
Strategic Framework
Ideally, an RTA would establish an integrated strategic framework for SEZ
programs of member countries, not only establishing rules of the game
with respect to financial incentives, but more broadly, enabling them to
complement each other’s resources and capacities and cooperate to
achieve shared goals.
An integrated strategic framework can take several forms. One such
form is to develop regional manufacturing or service linkages, using the
SEZs in the Context of Regional Integration 147
for priority sectors such as ICT considering the importance of sectors for
all member countries as well as the small size and resources of each
country. These are preliminary recommendations, and EAC member
countries have not yet taken any significant steps to implement them.
Yet, these countries have made first steps to unify the regulatory frame-
work and establish competent authorities that will have similar powers
across member countries. How effectively the EAC member states build
on this common ground and integrate their SEZ program is likely to play
an important role in their ability to take full advantage of the customs
union and transport facilities to achieve greater regional integration,
more effective trade and investment, and, ultimately, more rapid and
sustainable growth.
Conclusion
When a country participates in an RTA, export-based preferential tariff
treatment (a typical incentive granted under SEZ programs) poses prob-
lems such as tariff-jumping and raises concerns over local business com-
petitiveness. Because such preferential treatment tends to be granted for
a certain period of time, these incentives cannot be removed immediately.
Therefore, preventing duty-free entrance of SEZ-processed goods is prob-
ably a necessary measure as an immediate response to protect the effec-
tiveness of an RTA. Although it may be a best available temporary
measure at the introduction of a RTA, more creative solutions may be
appropriate in the longer term to avoid creating a mutually exclusive
system between these two instruments of trade and investment: RTAs
and SEZs. It would also be worthwhile for RTAs to consider options to
provide exceptional treatment or a transitional period under special cir-
cumstances to allow a smoother transition to greater integration, as the
case examples from NAFTA and SACU illustrated.
In addition to passive responses to these issues rising from RTAs and
SEZs, RTA member countries should move forward to consider harmoniza-
tion of SEZ programs to further promote regional integration. Traditionally,
SEZ have been employed as a country-specific policy instrument. Therefore,
coordinating among member countries on regulatory framework, financial
incentives, and strategic framework of SEZ program can be a challenging
and time-consuming task. Such collective efforts have the potential not
only to yield the short-term benefits in the form of trade and invest-
ment, but also to build collaboration toward deeper regional economic
integration.
150 Special Economic Zones
• COMESA Treaty
• Protocol on the rules of origin for products to be traded between the
member states of the COMESA
Notes
1. Multiple variants of regional trade agreements and terminologies are not
always used consistently by different institutions and researchers. This report
uses the generic term of “regional trade agreement” to refer to all reciprocal
preferential agreements, including free trade agreements, customs unions,
partial scope agreements, and economic integration agreements. For more
detail, refer to Acharya, Crawford, Maliszewska, and Renard (forthcoming).
2. Some SEZs, normally traditional EPZs, target foreign investors explicitly by
setting the eligibility criteria of foreign capital. Others do not limit the zones
to foreign investors, but other eligibility criterion often become too high a
hurdle for domestic investors, especially those with limited capital. More
recently established zones, particularly those under the more modern SEZ
models, encourage domestic as well as foreign investment.
3. Most of the discussion in this section is drawn from Granados (2003).
4. Although erosion of the bloc constitutes one of the major reasons why
RTAs takes measures against allowing the duty-free entry of SEZ-processed
goods, a liberal trade policy would argue against any bloc attempting to
raise trade barriers against countries outside the bloc. Such a barrier typi-
cally would lead to trade diversion and goes against the principles of “open
regionalism.”
5. WTO prohibits subsidies and other financial incentives that are conditional
on export performance. Therefore, various schemes of SEZs also raise an issue
for WTO accession and compliance. This chapter focuses on the discussion of
SEZs and RTAs and leaves the discussion of WTO compatibility to other
literatures.
6. Indeed, this “infant industry argument” is one of the primary contentions of
many countries for maintaining tariffs on foreign producers. This is a contro-
versial argument, which various empirical research has both refuted and
supported.
7. Although 60 percent is the general rule, the actual rule is more complex and
depends on product categories.
8. Taking advantage of COMESA’s rules of origin, South African juice makers
process and package South African juice concentrate in a free zone in
Mauritius for sale in the COMESA market. See box 4 of Flatters (2002). The
example is cited as a successful case of investment generation through a lower
requirement of local content. Yet, at the same time, this practice may be plac-
ing local juice producers at disadvantage.
9. Eligible industries include electrical, electronic, furniture, toys and sporting
goods, footwear, mining and metallurgy, capital goods, photographic, agricul-
tural machinery, various industries, chemicals, rubber and plastics, iron and
steel, medicines and medical equipment, transport, automotive and vehicle
SEZs in the Context of Regional Integration 155
parts, paper and cardboard, leather and hides, textiles and clothing, chocolates
and confectionary, and coffee.
10. While it is considered in practice that 80 percent minimum export
requirement may apply to SEZ operators, technically, it may not be the
case when the EAC agreements are analyzed. Whereas the EAC Customs
Protocol stipulates that an 80 percent minimum export requirement
applies to any “export promotion scheme,” that is, economic benefit con-
tingent on export performance, it is not clear whether this rule applies to
SEZs. First, the extraterritoriality of SEZs may make the export promotion
argument irrelevant for SEZs. Second, analysis of the agreements, particu-
larly Part G of the EAC Customs Protocol, reveals that free ports and
other special economic arrangement do not constitute an “export promo-
tion scheme.”
11. See Landingin and Wadley (2005) and Australia Department of Foreign
Affairs and Trade (2005) for more examples of Asian growth triangles.
References
Acharya, Rohini, Jo-Ann Crawford, Maryla Maliszewska, and Christelle Renard.
2011. “Landscape.” In Handbook on Preferential Trade Agreements, edited by
J. P. Chauffour and J. C. Maur. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Australia Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. 1995. Growth Triangles of
South East Asia. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
Baldwin, Richard. Forthcoming. “Economics.” In Handbook on Preferential Trade
Agreements, edited by J. P. Chauffour, and J. C. Maur. Washington, DC: World
Bank.
FIAS (Foreign Investment Advisory Service). 2008. Special Economic Zones:
Performance, Lessons Learned, and Implications for Zone Development.
Washington, DC: FIAS, the World Bank Group.
Flatters, Frank. 2002. “The SADC Trade Protocol: Outstanding Issues on Rules of
Origin.” Updated version of background paper prepared for the Second
SADC Roundtable on Rules of Origin, held in Gaborone, Botswana, October
24–26, 2001. Available at http://qed.econ.queensu.ca/pub/faculty/flatters/
writings/ff_sadc_roo_tnf.pdf. Accessed April 2010.
Granados, Jaime. 2003. “Export Processing Zones and Other Special Regimes in
the Context of Multilateral and Regional Trade Negotiations.” Inter-American
Development Bank. Available at http://www.iadb.org/intal/intalcdi/
PE/2007/00739.pdf. (Accessed April 2010).
Landingin, Nathaniel, and David Wadley. 2005. “Export Processing Zones and
Growth Triangle Development: The Case of the BIMP-EAGA, Southeast
Asia.” Journal of International Development 17: 67–96.
156 Special Economic Zones
Malaver, Yeny. 2009. “Mercosur and Its Effects to Special Economic Zones.”.
Mimeo. Investment Climate Department. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Manchanda, Sumit. Interview. Investment Climate Advisory Services. Washington,
DC: World Bank Group.
WTO (World Trade Organization). 2009. Multilateralizing Regionalism: Challenges
for the Global Trading System, edited by R. Baldwin and P. Low. Geneva: World
Trade Organization.
PA R T I I
Introduction
One of the original pioneers of free zones (FZs), the Dominican Republic
is probably the Western Hemisphere’s most widely recognized success
story in the literature on free zones. Indeed, few other countries world-
wide have used the free zones program as effectively as an engine of
diversification and growth. Fueled by the offshoring of the U.S. textile
and garment industry (see box 7.1) and supported by preferential trade
agreements and a favorable exchange rate policy, the FZs were principally
responsible for the Dominican Republic’s shift away from a commodity-
oriented economy, with the manufacturing sector growing from just 18
percent of GDP in the 1970s to 30 percent by the 2000s. GDP growth
in the Dominican Republic has far exceeded the regional and global aver-
age in every decade since FZs were established. At its peak in 2003, FZ
companies accounted for 7.5 percent of total GDP in the country.
159
160 Special Economic Zones
Box 7.1
After rapid growth in FDI and exports throughout the 1980s and most
of the 1990s (FDI, for example, grew 37 percent per year between 1994
and 1999), over the past decade, the Dominican Republic has faced sig-
nificant threats to their FZ-based economic model. Between 1999 and
2003, a rise in oil prices; global economic slowdown; the impact of
September 11, 2001, on tourism; and the collapse of the second-largest
Dominican private bank, Baninter, all contributed to slowing growth in
the Dominican Republic economy. But for the FZ sector in particular, the
end of the MFA and the growing dominance of Asian manufacturing
threaten the future of the Dominican Republic’s textile and garments-
exporting sector, which is at the heart of the FZs. The program has
The Challenge of Adjustment in the Dominican Republic’s Free Zones 161
stagnated since 2004 in terms of its value added, with its subsequent
contribution to national GDP halving in only five years.
In response to this stagnation, the government has attempted some
policy reforms in the FZ sector and given policy priority to wider eco-
nomic competitiveness. Among other measures taken in recent years,
customs procedures were streamlined, tariffs were reduced, import sur-
charges and export taxes were eliminated, and new legislation was
adopted on government procurement, competition policy, and intellec-
tual property rights. On the trade policy side, the Dominican Republic
signed the FTA among the Dominican Republic, Central America, and
the United States (DR-CAFTA) and the economic partnership agree-
ment (EPA) between the European Union and the Caribbean Forum of
African, Caribbean, and Pacific States.
It appears, however, that the malaise in the FZ sector has deepened
through the recent global economic crisis. Since the beginning of 2009,
exports have declined considerably. Although there is some evidence of
slowly increasing diversification in manufacturing and a shift to more
value added production activities as well as services in the FZs, many
argue that the FZ program is principally to blame for the economy’s
overdependence on apparel manufacturing and its relative failure to
adjust to changing comparative advantage. Indeed, the FZ’s export-ori-
ented growth model, which relied on cheap labor and trade preferences,
was perhaps equipped to deliver jobs but not necessarily able to facilitate
substantial poverty reduction or an evolutionary pattern of upgraded in
the economy. Whether success will continue into the future, given the
evidence of declining competitiveness in recent years, remains to be
seen.
The Dominican Republic’s experience highlights the limitations of FZ
programs that rely on sources of competitiveness that are unlikely to
remain sustainable—specifically, low wages, trade preferences, and fiscal
incentives. Although these all may offer valuable advantage in the short
term, the Dominican Republic (like many countries who have embarked
on export processing zones) failed to build competitiveness in parallel,
through investments in education and skills, and through integration of
FZ firms with the local economy. This chapter discusses briefly the his-
tory and achievements of the FZ program in the Dominican Republic. It
focuses on the challenges that the program faces in light of declining
competitiveness in traditional labor-intensive garment production, the
government and FZ industry’s response, and the gaps in the long-term
approach to these challenges.
162 Special Economic Zones
Box 7.2
tax, import duties, value added tax,5 and property taxes. Tax exemp-
tions are valid for a period of 15 years for location in most zones;
a special exemption period of 20 years is offered for developers and
companies in free zones located in provinces on the Haitian border.
Both periods may be extended on a company-by-company basis, upon
petition to Consejo Nacional de Zonas Francas de Exportación or
National Free Zones Council (CNZFE). FZ companies are required to
export at least 80 percent of their production, although this restriction
can be lifted in cases in which the product is not manufactured
domestically and if local inputs account for at least 25 percent of value.
Box 7.3
The FZs became the most dynamic engine of growth in the Dominican
Republic’s economy during the 1980s and 1990s. Between 1985 and
1989, the number of FZs more than tripled, from 6 to 19, the number of
FZ companies rose from 146 to 220, and employment jumped from
36,000 to nearly 100,000. The program continued to expand during the
1990s, helped in part by the government enacting a comprehensive FZ law
and regulations in 1990. By the end of the 1990s, the Dominican Republic
had more than 50 operating industrial parks housing more than 500 com-
panies. In addition, more than 100 single factory zones, known as zonas
francas especiales (ZFEs) have been established since the 1990 law. The
program reached its peak in terms of employment (195,000) in 2000; this
was equivalent to up to 10 percent of the country’s total employment.
In the past decade, however, the zones have faced major challenges
(see figure 7.1) related to competitiveness in the core textile and apparel
Figure 7.1 Index of Growth (1995 = 100) in the Free Zone Program
175
150
125
100
75
50
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Figure 7.2 Free Zone Value Added (US$m) and Contribution to GDP, 1995–2008
1,800 8.0%
1,600 7.0%
1,400
6.0%
1,200
5.0%
1,000
4.0%
800
3.0%
600
400 2.0%
200 1.0%
0 0.0%
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
value-added (US$m) contribution to GDP (%-right hand axis)
at least 10 zones (most of them housing only one or two firms) closing
since 2004.
Figure 7.3 Free Zone Exports (US$ million) and Share of National Exports
6,000 90%
80%
5,000
70%
4,000 60%
50%
3,000
40%
2,000 30%
20%
1,000
10%
0 0%
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Figure 7.4 Index of Free Zone Exports: Textile versus Nontextile (1995 = 100)
300
275
250
225
200
175
150
125
100
75
50
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
exports textile exports nontextile exports
past decade, this represented a massive shock to the program, and the
economy more widely.
Figure 7.5 sets out clearly the level of decline in the Dominican
Republic’s position as a textile and apparel sector exporter to the
United States. The first graph shows that exports of knitwear to the
United States fell by more than half between 2004 and 2008, as
the Dominican Republic was replaced mainly by Asian exporters, as
well as Nicaragua. Although most other producers in the region also
experienced declines, none was as deep as in the Dominican Republic.
The graph on the right suggests that this pattern is deepening through
the recent global crisis. The Dominican Republic not only experienced a
much deeper decline in textiles and apparel exports to the United States
in 2009 than most other countries, but it continued to face declining
exports in 2010, whereas almost all other countries experienced consid-
erable recovery.
The key question is whether the FZ program, which was heavily
reliant on one sector (textiles and garments) and one market (the
United States) can diversify and upgrade itself, in the face of commod-
itization and increasing competition in this sector. Figure 7.4 shows
that nontextile exports have grown rather well, offsetting much of the
decline in textile exports. What also is clear, however, is that the growth
170
Figure 7.5 Comparative Growth in U.S. Imports of Knitwear by Key Countries, 2004–08, and U.S. Imports of Apparel and Textiles
by Key Country, 2009 and 2010
240
30%
220 25%
200 20% 18%
180 13% 13% 14%
160 10%
5%
140
0%
120 0%
100 –2%
–4% –3%
–6%
80 –10% –9%
60
40 –20%
–22%
04
05
06
07
08
20
20
20
20
20 –30% –27%
DR
as
iti
sh
m
China Bangladesh Vietnam
gu
in
Ha
na
ur
de
Ch
ra
nd
et
la
Lesotho El Salvador Nicaragua
ca
Vi
ng
Ho
Ni
Ba
Guatamala Mexico Dominican Republic
Honduras 2009 v 2008 2010 YTD (6/10)
200,000
180,000
160,000
140,000
number of jobs
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
19 9
19 1
19 3
75
19 7
79
19 1
19 3
19 5
87
19 9
19 1
19 3
19 5
97
20 9
01
20 3
05
07
6
7
7
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
0
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
Source: CNZFE.
172 Special Economic Zones
with the WTO. The tax exemptions that are at the heart of the FZ regime
are not compatible with the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing
Measures (SCM) signed under WTO. In 2002, the Dominican Republic
notified the WTO of the subsidies and requested an extension of the
transition period allowed by the agreement (WTO 2002). In September
2007, the Dominican Republic requested continuation of the extension
relating to Law No. 8-90 (WTO 2007c; also see WTO 2007a, which
contains an updating notification of subsidies under Law No. 8-90), in
accordance with the procedure adopted by the General Council in favor
of certain developing-country members (WTO 2007b). According to this
procedure, the members concerned undertook to eliminate export subsi-
dies by December 31, 2015, at the latest and to submit an action plan for
this purpose in 2010. By amending the FZ Law and abolishing the local
content requirements and restrictions on sales in the domestic market, as
well as the 25 percent export performance requirements on several prod-
ucts, the Dominican Republic authorities believe that Law No. 56-07
represents a step forward in bringing domestic legislation in line with the
SCM. Of course, much remains to be done to bring the program into
compliance.
Box 7.4
(–59 percent) and electronics (–51 percent).11 This suggests that the prob-
lem is not simply one of the MFA phaseout or of the global economic
crisis, but rather a more fundamental problem of competitiveness (and
the limited scale of upgrading in the Dominican Republic’s FZ sector).
The challenges being faced by the Dominican Republic highlight the
classic problems of many export-processing programs worldwide. In addi-
tion to weak infrastructure, particularly the instability and cost of electri-
cal power, the export sector faces structural challenges, including (1) an
overreliance on trade preferences and narrow export markets; (2) poor
linkages with the local economy, which prevent the program from facili-
tating dynamic gains that could contribute to economywide upgrade;
(3) failing to recognize or act on the links between social upgrading and
sustainability of the FZ program. Each of these challenges is summarized
in the following sections.
sector, and the government—to upgrading the skills and technology base
of the country and to developing more sustainable sources of competitive
advantage.
Notes
1. Exports from Costa Rica, whose wages are higher than those in the
Dominican Republic, declined by an even more rapid 38 percent during this
period.
2. This law, however, was not designed specifically to support the Gulf and
Western investment. Rather, the law was really an import-substitution
vehicle—it did not specifically define an FZ regime, rather it established the
zero tax incentive package for companies who exported at least 80 percent of
their production.
3. Average of Thailand, Sri Lanka, Philippines, China (World Bank 1988, cited
in Kaplinsky 1993).
4. Most studies, however, have found that wages in the zones are, on average,
well above the national minimum wage, particularly when overtime and pro-
ductivity bonuses are included.
5. Value added tax known as Impuesto de Transferencia a los Bienes in the
Dominican Republic.
6. The area around Santiago is the most important agricultural region in the
Dominican Republic. The city has developed a major services economy,
which is critical to provide the business services and support required by
manufacturers in the free zones.
7. Two public parks that were created by the Consejo Estatal del Azucar (the
state-owned sugar corporation) were transferred to a publicly owned bank,
Banco de Reservas, under whose ownership they remain. The rest of the public
parks are under the responsibility of Proindustria.
8. This excludes receipts from tourism.
9. See Decree No. 552-07, creating the Employment Protection and Creation
Fund with the aim of preventing job losses in free zones, of October 8,
2007.
10. Including duty-free imports and exemption from corporate and value-added
taxes.
11. Data on apparel and electronics are from the first half of 2009 only.
12. By contrast, 366 companies sold to the United States, 45 to Puerto Rico,
44 to Spain, 36 to Germany, and 27 to Haiti (CNZFE 2009).
The Challenge of Adjustment in the Dominican Republic’s Free Zones 181
References
CNZFE (Consejo Nacional de Zonas Francas de Exportación). 2009. Available at
http://www.cnzfe.gob.do (accessed December 2009).
Kaplinsky, R. 1993. “Export Processing Zones in the Dominican Republic:
Transforming Manufactures into Commodities.” World Development 21 (11):
1851–65.
Sanchez-Ancochea, D. 2006. “Development Trajectories and New Comparative
Advantages: Cost Rica and the Dominican Republic under Globalization.”
World Development 34 (6): 996–1015.
Schrank, A. 2008. “Export Processing Zones in the Dominican Republic: Schools
or Stopgaps?” World Development 36 (8): 1381–97.
U.S. Office of Textiles and Apparel. 2009. Major Shippers Report. Available at
http://otexa.ita.doc.gov (accessed December 2009).
World Bank. 2006. “Dominican Republic Country Economic Memorandum: The
Foundations of Growth and Competitiveness,” September. World Bank,
Washington, DC.
WTO (World Trade Organization). 2002. Document G/SCM/N/74/DOM,
January 8.
WTO. 2007a. Document G/SCM/N/160/DOM, July 5.
WTO. 2007b. Document WT/L/691, July 31.
WTO. 2007c. Document G/SCM/N/163/DOM, September 14.
CHAPTER 8
Introduction
Recognition is growing that technological innovation is central to eco-
nomic growth and development both in high-income and developing
countries (Aghion and Howitt 1998; Fagerberg, Srholec, and Verspagen
2009). Innovation should be understood as the implementation of new or
improved products, processes, marketing, or organizational methods in
business practices and workplace organization (OECD 2005). Importantly
for developing countries, “new” is meant in a relative sense, insofar as
innovation can be as much about applying existing global technologies
that are new to the local context or bringing small improvements to exist-
ing technologies (incremental innovation) as it is about the creation of
“new-to-the-world” innovations (radical innovations).
Against this backdrop, FDI, trade, and innovation are likely to be
closely intertwined and mutually beneficial for development. Indeed,
trade and FDI represent an opportunity for less developed economies to
access high(er) technology goods and services, as well as to become famil-
iar with innovative processes and demanding markets.
Since the 1990s, economic globalization (Bhagwati 2004) and, in
particular, the lowering of transportation costs and the fragmentation of
the production chain (Friedman 2005; Porter 1990; Saxenian 1999) have
183
184 Special Economic Zones
Box 8.1
• Training the SEZ workforce on the job and, in parallel, upgrading the
national education system can have important benefits for the overall
skill level.
• A strong point of many of the more successful SEZs was this concomi-
tant development of an increasingly well-trained SEZ workforce, most
often accompanied by major efforts involving the national education
system. In 1968, for example, 57 percent of the SEZ workforce in
Taiwan had only elementary school training. In 1990, 87 percent had
more than elementary training. In the 1970s in the Republic of Korea,
80 percent of the workforce had completed middle school. This pro-
portion was 95 percent in 1990. In terms of gender, these figures are
even more dramatic. In the 1970s, only 20 percent of women working
in SEZs in the Republic of Korea had completed high school, as com-
pared with more than 95 percent today. Table 8.2 gives examples of
on-the-job training provided in some SEZs.
90 private share, %
2.5 80% HCI Product
80
semiconductor,
70 mobile phone, DTV,
GERD/GDP, % 2 display, automobile,
60 (right axis) ship-building, etc.
50%
50 1.5
government share, %
40
1
30
light
20
0.5 industry
14% product
10
0 0 6% agricultural
product
64
66
68
70
72
74
76
78
80
82
19 4
86
88
90
92
94
96
98
00
02
04
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
8
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
Box 8.2
higher value added sectors. These successful SEZs proved extremely good
at moving away from the low-skilled, labor-intensive industries of their
first years of operation. New garment industries were not allowed in
Taiwan, China’s EPZ as of 1974, for example.
Box 8.3
Box 8.4
Several studies (FIAS 2008; Wei 2000) have insisted on the impor-
tance of the geographic location of the SEZs. Indeed, an SEZ in a city or
periurban area has easier access to firms, capital, and skilled labor and
can integrate with other firms more easily. For example, while the
maquiladoras traditionally have purchased no more than 3 percent of
their overall material inputs from Mexican sources, the maquiladoras of
Mexico’s three largest metropolitan centers, Mexico City, Guadalajara,
and Monterrey, procured 31 percent, 16 percent, and 10.5 percent,
respectively, of their inputs from domestic sources (MacLachlan and
Aguilar 1998).
Also, the geographical proximity to a city or rapidly developing region
has proven important for SEZs to support innovation activities in East
Asia: In China, these include Shenzhen (next to Hong Kong, China),
Zhuhai (next to Macau SAR, China), Xiamen and Shantou (across the
Taiwan Strait opposite Taiwan, China), and Pudong (next to Shanghai).
In the Republic of Korea, these include Masan (next to Masan port, not
far from Busan). In Taiwan, China, these include Nanzih (next to
Kaohsiung) and Taichung (next to Chuanghua).
Overall, the success of SEZs in fostering innovation in developing
countries seems crucially determined by the absorption capabilities of
the domestic economy. This pleads the case for encompassing targeted
innovation policies, aimed at creating optimal conditions to domestically
accompany openness to trade and FDI.
Labor-Intensive Manufacturing
Developing labor-intensive manufacturing activities linked to domestic
production capabilities is typically the second step in the development of
an SEZ. This step can be one of intense learning and can increase basic
technological capabilities, provided that the proper channeling of capital
inflows and appropriate regulatory guidance is given.
In 1982, in Shenzhen, the SEZ authorities issued strong guidelines
to foreign investors on which sectors FDI should focus. Interestingly,
Shenzhen initially aimed to attract high-technology firms, but prag-
matically dropped the term “high-technology” for “some technology” in
its requirements for manufacturing FDI, which was in greater accord
with the absorptive capacity of the area. Small manufacturing (mainly
processing and assembly) enterprises in mature industries were set up,
based on differential wage costs. Cheap labor combined with guaran-
teed production capability involved only minor technological adapta-
tion capability. “Exports” of these manufactured products started to be
allowed on a restricted basis to the domestic market. Here, the needed
technological capability was in adapting the manufactured products to
the domestic market: changing the product to suit domestic market
conditions and demands, adapting the product or process to take into
account special features of local material supply, and adapting prod-
ucts to local conditions (climate, temperature, etc.). Seventy percent of
the enterprises in the SEZ were upgraded technologically over a
10-year period (Liu 2002). If the appropriate linkages are not made
and technological capabilities are not built up, SEZs may give lacklus-
ter results (see box 8.5).
Fostering Innovation in Developing Economies through SEZs 199
Box 8.5
SEZs in Cambodia
FDI has grown at a high rate over the past decade, with $10.9 billion coming into
Cambodia in 2008, playing a key role in employment. The initiatives taken to
maximize linkages to the MNCs and foreign-invested enterprises to upgrade the
domestic technology and knowledge base have remained scarce. Importantly,
the impact of the significant FDI Cambodia receives on technology transfer and
spillover appears to be negligible. SEZs are an important part of the country’s
economic development because they bring infrastructure, jobs, skills, and
enhanced productivity. Since 2005, the Royal Government of Cambodia has
approved a total of 21 SEZs. Of the 21, only 6 have commenced operations as of
early 2010. Virtually no policies, mechanisms, or incentives are in place to encour-
age foreign firms to engage in technology or knowledge transfer to local compa-
nies, or to collaborate with local companies. In interviews with the SEZs in Phnom
Penh, it appeared that little interaction existed between firms in the SEZs and
local universities or technical institutes; firms occasionally train their low-skilled
workers in-house. Highly skilled workers and managers usually are brought in
from the respective country of origin. Inputs and technology also are imported.
Source: Author, based on Zeng and White (2010).
Technology-Intensive Manufacturing
The third step—transitioning to high(er) technology manufacturing—
was gradual in all East Asian SEZs, particularly in view of the fact that
technological capabilities take quite some time to build up. In the case of
Shenzhen, the transition to technology-intensive manufacturing was
brought on naturally by two factors: the cost of land, making it no longer
a place for labor-intensive manufacturing industries; and increasing com-
petition from mainland China and other SEZs, including firms set up
outside the SEZs by former employees. Through a number of deliberate
government policy reorientations, FDI for high-technology firms was
200 Special Economic Zones
FDI X FDI X
labo
r
SEZ skills
Domestic firms SEZ
technology
national or “host” economy
reforming national or “host” economy
Source: Author.
Conclusion
This chapter has attempted to clarify how SEZs can stimulate innovation
and advocate proactive and sequential policies to facilitate domestic
absorption of foreign technological know-how.
Developing an SEZ that boosts technological change and innovation
can be rewarding for developing-country governments. However, devel-
oping an SEZ that drives innovation potentially involves a relatively
coordinated set of medium-term policies, many of which attempt to
Fostering Innovation in Developing Economies through SEZs 201
Table 8.3 Staged Approach to the Development of an SEZ: The Shenzhen Case
Stage Inception Labor-intensive Technology-intensive
Comparative Incentive package Low-cost labor surplus; Low-cost highly edu-
advantage for FDI; location location-specific cated labor; accumu-
specific advantage; huge lated skills and capital;
advantage domestic market; huge domestic
incentive package market; FDI with ad-
for FDI vanced technologies
Main prod- Tourism and real Toys, clothes, and Computers, switches,
ucts and estate develop- bicycles integrated circuits
sectors ment
Source of None Hong Kong, China Industrial countries
technology
Role of Infrastructure Help firms find employ- Technology infrastruc-
government building; Institu- ees nationwide to keep ture building; protec-
tional reforms the competitive posi- tion of intellectual
tion; faced with other property rights
low-cost competitors
Source: Wei (2000).
Note: FDI = foreign direct investment.
FDI X FDI X
labo
labo r
r skills
skills
SEZ technology
Domestic firms
technology ion
competitive competit ade
tech upgr
domestic firms stimulates
reforming national or “host” economy:
-upgarding local skills/firms
-reforming business environment national or “host” economy
Source: Author.
upgrade domestic conditions (see table 8.4). These policies may include
fostering linkages and spillovers between firms in the SEZs and firms
outside, in particular, by building domestic capabilities in local firms and
training a domestic labor force to take advantage of spillovers. Fostering
labor circulation from the SEZs to the domestic economy can generate
positive spillover effects. Experience suggests that reforms of the domes-
tic investment climate, to emulate to some extent that of the SEZs, can
help domestic firms develop. Finally, it is important to choose the location
of the SEZs carefully.
202 Special Economic Zones
Notes
1. Notably, because firms that export typically make deliberate decisions before
exporting in terms of investment training and technology, the before and after
effects are likely to be smaller.
2. Some data from Taiwan, China, are interesting in this respect.
3. The World Bank’s regular Investment Climate Assessment and Doing Business
reports can provide useful guidance to necessary national reforms.
References
Abramowitz, M. 1994. The Origins of the Postwar Catch-up and Convergence Boom
in the Dynamics of Technology, Trade and Growth, 1994. Cambridge, UK:
Edward Elgar Publishing.
Aggarwal, A. 2006. “Special Economic Zones—Revisiting the Policy Debate.”
Economic and Political Weekly (November 4).
Fostering Innovation in Developing Economies through SEZs 203
Aghion, P., and P. Howitt. 1998. Endogenous Growth Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Bhagwati, J. 2004. In Defense of Globalization. Oxford, UK: Oxford University
Press.
Basile, A., and D. Germidis. 1984. Investing in Free Export Processing Zones. Paris:
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Callanan, B. 2000. Ireland’s Shannon Story: A Case Study of Local and Regional
Development. Dublin: Irish Academic Press.
Chandra, V., ed. 2006. Technology, Adaptation and Exports—How Some Developing
Countries Got It Right. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Chung, S. C. 2010. “Korean Development and Innovation Policy: Any Lessons?”
Presentation given at Rapid Innovation Action Learning Workshop, Beirut,
Lebanon, July 4–6.
Coe, D. T., E. Helpman, and A. W. Hoffmaister. 1997. “North-South R&D
Spillovers.” The Economic Journal 7 (40): 134–49.
Easterly, W., and R. Levine. 2001. “What Have We Learned from a Decade of
Empirical Research on Growth? It’s Not Factor Accumulation: Stylized
Facts and Growth Models.” In The World Bank Economic Review 15 (2):
177–219.
Eaton, J., and S. Kortum. 2001. “Technology, Trade and Growth: A Unified
Framework.” European Economic Review 45 (4–6): 742–55.
Fagerberg, J. 1988. “International Competitiveness.” The Economic Journal 98:
355–74.
Fagerberg, J., M. Srholec, and B. Verspagen. 2009. Innovation and Economic
Development. Working Paper 32, United Nation University–MERIT,
Maastricht.
FIAS (Foreign Investment Advisory Service). 2008. Special Economic Zones:
Performance, Lessons Learned, and Implications for Zone Development.
Washington, DC: FIAS.
Florida, R., and G. Gates. 2001. Technology and Tolerance: The Importance of
Diversity to High-Technology Growth. Washington, DC: Center on Urban and
Metropolitan Policy, The Brookings Institution.
Freeman, C. 1987. Technology, Policy, and Economic Performance: Lessons from
Japan. New York: Frances Printer Publishers.
Friedman, T.L. 2005. The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century.
New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
Global Economic Prospects. 2008. Technology Diffusion in the Developing World.
Washington, DC: World Bank.
204 Special Economic Zones
Hahm, S., C. Plein, and R. Florida. 1994. “The Politics of International Technology
Transfer: Lessons from the Korean Experience.” Policy Studies Journal 22 (2):
311–21.
Hoekman, B., and B. Javorcik. 2006. Global Integration and Technology Transfer.
Washington, DC: World Bank.
ILO (International Labour Organization). 1998. “‘Labor and Social Issues Relating
to Export Processing Zones.”‘ Technical background paper for the International
Tripartite Meeting of Export Processing Zone-Operating Countries in
Geneva, September 28 to October 2, 1998, International Labour Organization,
Geneva.
Jenkins, M., O. Esquivel, and B. Felipe Larrain. 1998. Export Processing Zones in
Central America. Development Discussion Paper No. 646, Harvard Institute
for International Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Johansson, H., and L. Nilsson. 1997. “Export Processing Zones as Catalysts.” World
Development 25 (12): 2115–28.
Keller, W. 2004. “International Technology Diffusion.” Journal of Economic
Literature.
Kim, L. 1980. “Stages of Development of Industrial Technology in a Developing
Country: A Model.” Research Policy 9 (3): 254–277.
Kusago, T., and Z. Tzannatos. 1998. Export Processing Zones: A Review in Need of
Update. Social Protection Discussion Paper No. 9802. Washington, DC: World
Bank.
Lall, S. 1980. “Vertical Inter-Firm Linkages in LDCs: An Empirical Study.” Oxford
Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 42: 203–06.
Lall, S. 1992. “Technological Capabilities and Industrialization.” World Development
20 (2): 165–86.
Leong, C. 2007. “A Tale of Two Countries: Openness and Growth in China and
India.” DEGIT conference paper. Available at http://www.ifw-kiel.de/
VRCent/DEGIT/paper/degit_12/C012_042.pdf.
Liu, Z., 2002. “Foreign direct investment and technology spillover: Evidence from
China.” Journal of Comparative Economics 30: 579–602.
MacLachlan and Aguilar. 1998. “Maquiladora Myths: Location and Structural
Change in Mexico’s Export Manufacturing Industry.” The Professional
Geographer 50 (3): 315–31.
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2005.
Measuring Globalisation: OECD Handbook on Economic Globalization
Indicators. Paris: OECD Press.
OECD. 2007. Globalisation and Regional Economies: Can OECD Regions Compete
in Global Industries? OECD Reviews of Regional Innovation. Paris: OECD.
Fostering Innovation in Developing Economies through SEZs 205
Omar, K., and W. Stoever. 2008. “The Role of Technology and Human Capital in
the EPZ Life-cycle.” Transnational Corporations 17 (1) (April): 135–60.
Pack, H., and K. Saggi. 2001. “Vertical Technology Transfer via International
Outsourcing.” Journal of Development Economics 46: 389–415.
Porter, Michael E. 1990. The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: Free
Press.
Saxenian, A. 1999. Silicon Valley’s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs. San Francisco:
Public Policy Institute of California.
Spar, D. 1998. Attracting High Technology Investment—Intel’s Costa Rican Plant.
FIAS Occasional Paper No. 11. Washington, DC: Foreign Investment Advisory
Service.
Storper, M., and M. Manville. 2006. “Behaviour, Preferences and Cities.” Urban
Studies 43 (8): 1247–74.
UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development). 2001. World
Investment Report. Promoting Linkages. Vienna: UNCTAD.
UNCTAD. 2003. Investment and Technology Policies for Competitiveness: Review of
Successful Country Experiences. Geneva: UNCTAD.
Wei, X. 2000. “Acquisition of Technological Capability through Special Economic
Zones (SEZs): The Case of Shenzhen SEZs.” Industry and Innovation 7 (2):
199–221.
Zeng, Z., and J. White. 2010. “Cambodia’s Special Economic Zones.” Mimeo.
Washington, DC: World Bank.
CHAPTER 9
Context
This chapter proposes the concept of an Early Reform Zone (ERZ) as a
policy tool for restructuring rent-distorted economies in Sub-Saharan
Africa. The ERZ is a second-generation SEZ that immediately provides
three critical postreform conditions—world-class infrastructure, business-
friendly services, and property rights and the rule of law—within dis-
torted economies to rapidly expand a dynamic market economy. Most
economies in Sub-Saharan Africa were badly distorted by decades of
patronage-driven rent cycling (Ndulu et al. 2008), whether the rent ema-
nated from natural resources, foreign aid (a geopolitical form of rent), or
manipulation by governments of relative prices (regulatory rent). The
emerging theory of rent cycling demonstrates that patronage-driven rent
deployment not only distorts the economy but also entrenches powerful
rent-seeking groups that oppose reform and trigger growth collapses
(Auty 2010).
207
208 Special Economic Zones
The political legacy of rent cycling explains why recovery from the
growth collapses of the 1970s and 1980s has been protracted for many
Sub-Saharan African economies: rent recipients oppose economic restruc-
turing because it shrinks their scope for rent extraction. The opposition
of rent recipients therefore requires that economic reform be expressly
complemented by a political strategy to manage the opposition. In con-
trast to the first-generation EPZs, the ERZ eschews subsidies and is not
time constrained. This approach is taken to discourage rent-seeking activ-
ity. Moreover, the ERZ also forms part of a specific development strategy
to steadily extend reform throughout the economy and simultaneously
build a proreform political coalition that, as the relative size of ERZ activ-
ity expands, becomes politically strong enough to neutralize the distorted
rent-seeking economy.
This chapter argues that the required political dimension can be most
effectively provided by the ERZ playing a critical role within a dual-track
reform strategy (Lau, Qian, and Roland 2000). In fact, key elements of
ERZs can be identified in some first-generation SEZs that were deployed
successfully as part of dual-track reform strategies in China, Malaysia, and
Mauritius to simultaneously restructure distorted economies and shrink
rent-seeking activity through the medium and long term. Most African
efforts to deploy SEZs occurred later, but rather than benefiting from the
experience of others, they frequently have disappointed because they
failed to provide the basic needs of a dynamic competitive economy.
Even when fiscal stabilization and trade opening were finally secured in
most Sub-Saharan African economies from the late 1990s, the results still
were disappointing because reformers neglected to establish a business-
friendly environment along with a proreform political coalition.
Deficiencies have included unreliable electricity and water services,
excess regulation, rent-seeking customs agencies, unsuitable locations,
and high-cost, low-productivity labor supplies (Farole 2010). The ERZ
expressly seeks to overcome such coordination failure by concentrating
activity within geographic zones in which services are provided by a
reputable commercially oriented management company that promotes
rapid expansion of both the firms and their interests. For those Sub-
Saharan African economies that have progressed further with economic
reform, ERZs can attract FDI and incubate dynamic internationally
competitive firms that eventually will challenge established monopolies
in the unreformed sector, forcing them to compete or shut down. The
ERZ therefore becomes a catalyst for reform of the initially much larger
rent-distorted economy not only through its internal expansion and
Early Reform Zones: Catalysts for Dynamic Market Economies in Africa 209
SEZs absorb unemployed labor and that is a useful net gain in itself,
this feature undercuts the first criticism. The second criticism is inac-
curate for EPZs that mature: there is incontrovertible evidence from
China, Malaysia, and Mauritius that over the long term, successful
EPZs raise skills and productivity, whereas rent-distorted economies
struggle. Finally, the ERZ is expressly designed to avoid the three
remaining criticisms of EPZs. First, ERZs expand rapidly so that even if
value added is a modest share of enterprise revenue, the aggregate
value added quickly becomes substantial and linkages proliferate with
adjacent Track 2 activity. Second, the ERZ offers a competitive incen-
tive regime rather than subsidies, which may have been necessary for
the first-generation SEZs in developing countries but no longer are
needed. Consequently, the risk of nurturing rent-seeking is diminished.
Third, ERZs generate taxes from the outset in addition to foreign
exchange from exports, technology transfer, and skills. In fact, because
the five criticisms apply to failed EPZs, in that specific context, they
may be correct.
Perhaps most important, ERZs aim not only to create employment,
exports, and taxes, but also to incubate dynamic competitive firms capa-
ble of rapidly developing and harnessing new ideas to drive welfare
improvements, an achievement central to sustaining gains in African wel-
fare. The new competitive enterprises in the Track 1 ERZs generate posi-
tive spillovers for adjacent Track 2 activity within the distorted economy.
Early Reform Zones: Catalysts for Dynamic Market Economies in Africa 213
6 percent annually through the 1970s and eased the simmering social
tension of the 1960s.
Mauritius’ SEZ joint ventures of the 1970s gave way in the 1980s to
mainly domestic investment, specializing in textiles. Once surplus labor
was absorbed and real wages began rising, however, low-value textile
items were relocated offshore to Madagascar, allowing Mauritius to focus
on higher value products such as textile design, spinning, weaving, and
knitting. This outcome flatly contradicts the criticism that SEZs merely
employ low-wage labor. At its peak, the Mauritius textile industry was the
second-largest world producer of knitted textiles; the third-largest
exporter of pure wool tissues, and the fourth-largest exporter of T-shirts
to Europe. The zone employed 60,000 workers in 500 firms generating
$1.2 billion in exports. A state enterprise serviced the SEZs and included
among its functions the provision of such externalities as training, invest-
ment credits, and negotiation of trade agreements. In 1985, 14 years after
the start-up, the government replaced the SEZ tax holiday with a 15
percent profit tax along with incentives to export for import substitution
firms within Track 2. By then, the two tracks had all but merged.
SEZ expansion drove Mauritius per capita GDP at 5.7 percent annu-
ally through the 1980s as rapid passage through the demographic transi-
tion cut population growth to 1 percent. Manufactured exports rose from
one-quarter of the total in 1980 to two-thirds in 1990, ending sugar’s
dominance. SEZ employment tripled and, by 1990, national unemploy-
ment fell to 4 percent from 21 percent, creating labor shortages that
strengthened pressure on firms to diversify into more productive activity.
By the mid-1990s, Mauritian textile wages were four times those of
China and Vietnam and prompted diversification into information tech-
nology within the evolving SEZ (Chernoff and Warner 2002). Services
increasingly drove the economy: tourist arrivals quintupled to 700,000 in
2003, and financial services rapidly expanded. Moreover, the government
used the sustained economic buoyancy to restructure the once-dominant
sugar industry as WTO rules phased out sugar’s geopolitical rent over
2001–2009.1
From 1971 onward, Mauritius’ SEZ attracted competitive manufac-
turing as part of a dual-track economic reform that postponed confronta-
tion with pro-redistribution political forces, including the powerful
unions in the initially dominant sugar industry until the dynamic sector
was sufficiently strong, both economically and politically, to absorb sur-
plus labor from the lagging sector and also to reform it. Interestingly,
Mauritius’ experience paralleled that of Malaysia after the Malaysian
216 Special Economic Zones
17 percent in 1987 (Edwards 1990), just 16 years after the SEZs were
established. The Mahathir government rashly launched a heavy industry
drive in the early 1980s, just as the Republic of Korea was reacting
strongly against that policy and the social and economic costs it had
imposed on the majority of the population. Much Malaysian heavy
industry was prone to rent-seeking and required prolonged adjustments
to mitigate the worst consequences. Fortunately, the export manufactur-
ing sector proved sufficiently resilient to absorb the costs of Malaysia’s
ill-judged heavy industry drive. Malaysia not only confirms the viability
of the dual-track strategy and the speed with which economywide
reform can be achieved but also demonstrates that the strategy can work
in a natural resource–abundant economy as well as in resource-poor
economies like Mauritius and China.
initially was well placed to sustain dual-track reform. The south coast
region had little obsolete industrial capital because of neglect under cen-
tral planning; it was well located to capture spillover effects from the
adjacent dynamic market economies of Hong Kong, China, and Taiwan,
China; and as a resource-poor region, the absence of natural resource
rents incentivized provincial and local governments to promote wealth
creation so they could provide employment and eventually expand the
tax base.
Throughout the 1980s, the SEZs combined lower central taxation
with enhanced infrastructure investment to attract foreign capital invest-
ment first to the original reform zones and then to additional zones
established along the coast (Litwack and Qian 1998). From the early
1990s, the tax benefits were removed from the zones, although invest-
ment in superior infrastructure continued to be concentrated, albeit in a
larger set of zones. From 1994, taxation was equalized across regions, and
government attention shifted from the coast to stimulating the lagging
interior regions. Moreover, government efforts also sharply intensified to
reform the large SOEs (the principal consumers of regulatory rent) in
Track 2 (Farole 2010), which no longer dominated industrial production
but a decade earlier had received a disproportionately high share of capi-
tal investment and had been sufficiently powerful politically to discour-
age top-down economic reform.
The SEZ strategy contributed strongly to China’s rise to become a
leading world exporter of manufactured goods and the principal recipient
of FDI among the developing economies. During 1979–95, the SEZs
helped China attract 40 percent of all FDI to developing countries, of
which the coastal areas received 90 percent. Guangzhou alone drew
40 percent of Chinese FDI, which with the two other local SEZs, lifted
the local share of FDI to 50 percent. Importantly, the gains were made
rapidly: whereas the south coast region occupies 5 percent of China’s
land area and held 19 percent of the population, by the mid-1990s, it
generated 32.7 percent of national GDP, which represented a gain in
share of 8.5 percent of national GDP during 1980–1995 (Golley 1999).
China experimented not only with economic incentives but also with
different forms of enterprise. The rise of new more flexible enterprises
resulted by the mid-1990s in the expansion of township and village
enterprises (TVEs), which were basically local devices to absorb surplus
rural labor in self-supporting employment. TVEs accounted for two-fifths
of China’s manufactured output, mostly for the domestic market. In
addition, however, joint ventures grew to 15 percent of manufactured
Early Reform Zones: Catalysts for Dynamic Market Economies in Africa 219
output, but they generated half of all China’s consumer goods and two-
fifths of its exports; MNCs produced half of all exports, worth 9 percent
of GDP (Gang 2001).
The SEZ experiment began to transform the Track 2 economy. It
rapidly turned the Zhu Delta around Guangzhou into the second of
three major Chinese agglomerations, with the established zone in the
Chang Delta centered on Shanghai and the third in the Bohai Triangle.
The agglomerations began exerting beneficial spillover effects on local
SOEs. Johnston (1999) shows that provinces hosting one of the three
agglomerations also hosted dynamic competitive manufacturing,
whereas provinces outside the agglomerations did not, including coastal
provinces outside the three agglomerations. Table 9.2 demonstrates
that agglomerations developed shares of non-SOEs and profits in excess
of their share of urban population. Interestingly, however, the profit-
ability of SOEs in the agglomeration provinces was disproportionately
higher than that of SOEs elsewhere. The higher ratio of viable SOEs in
the agglomerations confirms positive spillover effects from adjacent
market enterprises. The ratio of the share of SOE profits to the share
of SOEs in the interior regions remote from the three agglomerations
is significantly lower (see table 9.2), with the exception of three
resource-based activities (Henan oil and coal, Heilongjiang oil, and
Yunnun tobacco).
Aslund (1999) argues that such rapid extension of local competition
as occurred in China reduces scope for rent-seeking by government offi-
cials. Because growing competition between firms in adjacent authorities
shrinks the regulatory (government-created) rents, local officials thereby
acquire an incentive to pass residual claims, for example, from underem-
ployed workers, on to enterprise managers to avoid incurring onerous
social support charges (Li, Li, and Zhang 2000). Officials need to improve
efficiency incentives for local enterprises so that they can bear the extra
Table 9.2 Ratio of Firms, Workers and Profits to Urban Population Share,
Chinese Regions, 1996
assisting with finance and legal guidance. The mining area nurtures new
economic activity that can continue to operate after mining is exhausted,
helping to sustain the local economy. The proposed shift in corporate
social responsibility policy encourages local entrepreneurs to establish
both mine-related and unrelated businesses. The policy helps to build
local social capital (BP cooperated with the Open Society Foundation to
achieve this in Azerbaijan) within the mining region to strengthen the
lobbying capacity of local governments and businesses for legitimate cen-
tral government assistance.
Note
1. Mauritian sugar production costs under the Commonwealth Sugar Agreement
were 25 percent above world levels and reform aimed to cut them from
US$0.40/kilogram to US$0.26/kilogram by increasing the average factory
size, mechanizing cane production, and releasing marginal land for tourism
and information technology (IMF 2002).
References
Aslund, A. 1999. “Why Has Russia’s Economic Transformation Been So Arduous?”
Paper to the World Bank Annual Conference on Development Economics,
April 28–30, 1999, Washington, DC.
Auty, R. M. 1990. Resource-based Industrialization: Sowing the Oil in Eight Oil-
Exporting Economies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Auty, R. M. 1994. “Industrial Policy Reform in Six Large Newly Industrializing
Countries: The Resource Curse Thesis.” World Development 22: 11–26.
Auty, R. M. 2006. “From Mining Enclave to Economic Catalyst: Large Mineral
Projects in Developing Countries.” Brown Journal of World Affairs 13 (1):
135–45.
Auty, R. M. 2010. “Elites, Rent Cycling and Development: Adjustment to Land
Scarcity in Mauritius, Kenya and Cote d’Ivoire.” Development Policy Review
28 (4): 411–33.
Brautigam and Tang. 2010. ”China’s Investment in African Economic Zones”.
Mimeo. January, 2010, World Bank.
Early Reform Zones: Catalysts for Dynamic Market Economies in Africa 225
Li, S., S. Li, and W. Zhang. 2000. “The Road to Capitalism: Competition and
Institutional Change in China.” Journal of Comparative Economics 28:
269–92.
Litwack, J., and Y. Qian. 1998. “Balanced or Unbalanced Development: Special
Economic Zones as Catalysts for Transition.” Comparative Economics 26 (1):
117–41.
Murphy, K., A. Shliefer, and R. Vishny. 1989. “Industrialisation and the Big Push.”
Journal of Political Economy 97 (5): 1003–26.
Ndulu, B. J., S. A. O’Connell, J.-P. Azam, R. H. Bates, A. K. Fosu, J. W. Gunning,
and D. Njinkeu. 2008. The Political Economy of Economic Growth in Africa
1960–2000. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Parr, J. B. 1999. “Growth Pole Strategies in Regional Economic Planning: A
Retrospective View. Part 2. Implementation and Outcome.” Urban Studies
36 (8): 1247–68.
Salleh, I. M., and S. D. Meyanathan. 1993. Malaysia: Growth, Equity and Structural
Transformation. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Tuominen, K., and E. Lamminen. 2009. Russian Special Economic Zones. Turku:
Turku School of Economics.
Watson, P. L. 2001. Export Processing Zones: Has Africa Missed the Boat? Not Yet.
Washington, DC: World Bank.
World Bank. 2009. From Privilege to Competition: Unlocking Private-Led Growth in
MENA. Washington, DC: World Bank.
World Bank. 2010. China’s investment in African Special Economic Zones: Prospects,
Challenges and Opportunities. Economic Premise No. 5. Washington DC:
World Bank.
CHAPTER 10
Introduction
This case study first summarizes the conditions within which the
Mauritius Export Processing Zone (MEPZ) was established and the initial
policy objectives at its root. It then reviews the major national policy
changes that occurred in the early 1980s and how these affected the zone.
Following this review, it provides an overview of the MEPZ’s perfor-
mance since its early days and explores the current challenges being faced
by the program. Finally, it analyzes the relationship between the MEPZ
and broad economic reforms and develops conclusions.
227
228 Special Economic Zones
From the start, domestic firms invested significantly in the zone, at first
in joint ventures with foreign firms. This investment was allowed by gov-
ernment to limit capital flight. Domestic investment originated from the
sugar rent, which resulted from the European guaranteed prices and a
series of bumper crops. The zone experienced rapid initial growth, with
export growth averaging 9 percent per year between 1972 and 1977. By
1977, the MEPZ employed nearly 20,000 and generated about 50 per-
cent of domestic capital investment.
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
73
76
79
82
85
88
91
94
97
00
03
06
09
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
Source: Government of Mauritius, Mauritius Productivity and Competitiveness Indicators: 1999–2000 (Port Louis,
Mauritius: Central Statistical Office, 2010).
Planned Obsolescence? Export Processing Zones and Structural Reform in Mauritius 231
growth until 1976, (2) slow growth between 1976 and 1983, (3) explo-
sive growth between 1983 and 1988, (4) stabilization between 1989 and
1991, (5) decline between 1992 and 1997, (6) recovery in 1998–2002,
and (7) continuous decline since 2003. As at December 2009, employ-
ment was at its lowest level since 1986.
Investment (in 1982 prices, starting in 1979) shows greater variability
within the same general trend (see figure 10.2): (1) decline between 1979
and 1982; (2) explosive growth between 1983 and 1989; (3) decline
between 1990 and 1992; (4) cycles of recoveries and declines between
1993 and 2003; (5) strong recovery between 2004 and 2007, that year
being the highest recorded; and (6) collapse with the global economic
crisis in 2008 and 2009.
Export performance (see figure 10.3) and value added in constant
prices (1982) again has followed a similar general trend.5 Value added
peaked at 3.2 billion rupees in 2001.
Sectoral data are available only since 1992. The most remarkable facts
are (1) the absolute dominance of the apparel sector; (2) its continued
decline in relative and absolute terms in relation to the number of firms,
employment, and exports; and (3) the absence of one or several sectors
compensating for this decline. Indeed the growth of emerging sectors
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
79
81
83
85
87
89
91
93
95
97
99
01
03
05
07
09
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
Source: Government of Mauritius, Mauritius Productivity and Competitiveness Indicators: 1999–2000 (Port Louis,
Mauritius: Central Statistical Office, 2010).
232 Special Economic Zones
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
73
76
79
82
85
88
91
94
97
00
03
06
09
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
exports, f.o.b, Rs million, 1982 prices
Source: Government of Mauritius, Mauritius Productivity and Competitiveness Indicators: 1999–2000 (Port Louis,
Mauritius: Central Statistical Office, 2010).
such as fish products, and to a lesser extent gems and jewelry, has so
far proven insufficient, notably in terms of export performance and
employment.
Figure 10.4 clearly illustrates the dependency of the MEPZ on the
apparel sector. Not surprisingly, as the Mauritian economy has continued
to diversify over the past decade the MEPZ has declined in relation to the
rest of the economy. Manufacturing as a whole, which is highly concen-
trated in the MEPZ, represented 24 percent of GDP in 1998; it declined
to just 18.6 percent by 2006.
Although these figures indicate secular decline, closer analysis shows
that nuance may be required in interpreting the implications of these
trends for the future of the MEPZ. For example, evidence indicates that
the productivity of labor has not declined when measured through the
zone’s export intensity (exports and employment). As shown in figure
10.5, export intensity has increased steadily since 1987, although it
decreased during the early part of the boom. This suggests that efficiency
in labor utilization decreased as labor costs were low, given its abundance.
Data show the same trend when measuring the productivity of labor
through value added. It follows a curve closely aligned to that of export
intensity. The productivity of firms shows a similar trend.
Planned Obsolescence? Export Processing Zones and Structural Reform in Mauritius 233
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
1992 2000 2008
wearing apparel textile yarn and fabrics
food others
Source: Government of Mauritius, Mauritius Productivity and Competitiveness Indicators: 1999–2000 (Port Louis,
Mauritius: Central Statistical Office, 2010).
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
76
78
80
82
84
86
88
90
92
94
96
98
00
02
04
06
08
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
Source: Government of Mauritius, Mauritius Productivity and Competitiveness Indicators: 1999–2000 (Port Louis,
Mauritius: Central Statistical Office, 2010).
35
30
25
20
15
10
0
76
78
80
82
84
86
88
90
92
94
96
98
00
02
04
06
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
exports per Rs invested
Source: Government of Mauritius, Mauritius Productivity and Competitiveness Indicators: 1999–2000 (Port Louis,
Mauritius: Central Statistical Office, 2010).
Box 10.1
Today’s Challenges
Current challenges to the export processing zone include (1) relatively
low and unstable FDI, (2) rising labor and operating costs, (3) increased
competition from LDCs in a liberalizing trade environment, and (4)
absence of an industrial sector capable of replacing apparels as an
employment-intensive alternative.
FDI
FDI has rarely exceeded 5 percent of GDP. Even during the MEPZ boom
years, it exceeded this mark only in 1990 and 1991. On the one hand, it
is possible, given the evidence that the presence of multinationals fosters
technology transfers, that this low attraction of FDI has affected the
performance of the MEPZ, and the island’s growth and development
path as a whole. On the other hand, it is possible that this lack of FDI has
exerted pressure on the government and the domestic sector to acquire
technology through other means, including contract manufacturing, joint
ventures, vocational training, and the acquisition of up-to-date produc-
tion technologies. This is supported by data. Indeed, although FDI has
been low, domestic private sector investment has never been below
15 percent of GDP since 1985 and has often been over 20 percent.
Cost Structure
Unlike many countries that have embarked on EPZ strategies, Mauritius
has not been aggressive in seeking to keep real wages low through labor
market and exchange rate policies. Mauritius’ wages were 25 percent of
those of Hong Kong, China, and Singapore in the early 1980s. They have
increased rapidly since then. For instance, wages in the EPZ more than
doubled between 1992 and 2004, although they remained lower than in
the rest of the economy. In 2002, Mauritius’ labor costs were significantly
higher than those of major apparel producers.6 To partly compensate, a
regional division of labor between Mauritius and Madagascar has devel-
oped since the 1990s, controlled by Mauritian firms.7 Labor costs in
Madagascar were one-third of those in Mauritius. This overseas expansion
of Mauritian firms has continued, with apparel groups operating in South
and East Asia.
236 Special Economic Zones
Diversification
Efforts to diversify within the EPZ have had limited success, and the
zone’s core activities have remained largely concentrated on apparel.
Endeavors to increase textile manufacturing have born limited results.
Diversification has essentially taken place “outside” of the MEPZ, although
the fish-product sector, part of an expanding cluster called the seafood
hub, has shown remarkable growth. With an economic value added of
more than US$320 million in 2007, it combines activities such as licens-
ing and services of fishing vessels, aquaculture, exports of unprocessed fish
and processed fish, and more. Inside the MEPZ, the focus has been spe-
cialization and increased productivity. Most of the diversification has
taken place outside of manufacturing and processing altogether, particu-
larly in the growth of the services sector, including ICT services, financial
services, and the well-established tourism sector.
Although challenges exist, there is evidence of adjustment outside the
traditional MEPZ sector and of resiliency within it. This is supported by
Ancharaz’s (2009) detailed analysis of Mauritius’ revealed comparative
advantage against China for the island’s 10 main apparel exports for the
period 2000–2007. It managed to maintain competitiveness, and in some
cases to increase its competitiveness, in products like knitted T-shirts and
shirts, blouses, and shirt blouses. While other products have suffered, new
products have emerged. Thus, evidence indicates that the diversification
Planned Obsolescence? Export Processing Zones and Structural Reform in Mauritius 237
failure has been somewhat mitigated by the productivity gains and the
growth of Mauritian-owned companies that have attained autonomy
from the foreign companies they used to be partners with. Today,
Mauritius is the world’s second producer of knitwear, the third exporter
for pure wool garments, and the fourth supplier of T-shirts to the
European market.
develop and operate industrial estates, and plan and implement export-
oriented manufacturing.
Dommen and Dommen (1994, 25) have argued that, in all, the choice
of export-oriented growth and its early implementation through the
MEPZ led to an increase in state involvement in economic management.
Although the Ramgoolam government of the 1970s was keen on leaving
“the choice of industry to the imagination of the private sector, limiting
Government’s role to setting the legal and policy environment, the
Jugnauth government has been willing to take initiatives in pointing
directions for the private sector.”
From this perspective, it is evident that the creation of the MEPZ rep-
resented reform: it constituted the principal policy instrument through
which the island transitioned from an import-substitution growth model
to a dual economic regime.
Although this is undoubtedly true, one should not overstate the case
of a “grand reform strategy.” As indicated in “The policy environment,”
the MEPZ was at inception a “problem-solving tool” given the specific
function of absorbing labor surplus within an economic (and political
economic) enclave. Evidence of that exists in the fact that the two
development plans of the period (1971–1975 and 1975–1980) do not
give any clear indication of a shedding of a replacement of import-
substitution with export-oriented growth. Furthermore, evidence is
provided by the fact that protection remained high. According to
Subramanian (2009),
During the 1970s and 1980s, Mauritius remained a highly protected econ-
omy: the average rate of protection was high and dispersed. In 1980, the
average effective protection exceeded 100 per cent, and although this dimin-
ished by the end of the 1980s, it was still very high (65 per cent). Moreover
until the 1980s, there were also extensive quantitative restrictions in the
form of import licensing, covering nearly 60 per cent of imports... An alterna-
tive scheme of classification that has been devised in the IMF ranked
Mauritius as one of the most protected economies in the early 1990s. (15)
The creation of the EPZ generated new profit opportunities, without taking
protection away from the import-substituting groups. The segmentation of
labor markets was particularly crucial in this regard, as it prevented the
expansion of the EPZ (which employed mainly female labor) from driving
wages up in the rest of the economy, and thereby disadvantaging import-
substituting industries. New profit opportunities were created at the margin,
while leaving old opportunities undisturbed. (12)
• The structural reforms of the late 1970s and early 1980s.8 Restraints on
government expenditures and the reform of the incentive structure
played a key role in the post-1984 prosperity.
• The success of the nontraditional export sector (i.e., the EPZ). And this
strategy did not simply equate to lesser state intervention.
Conclusion
Static versus Dynamic Impact
Conventional economic assessments and cost-benefit analyses, while
useful in their own right, may be too narrow in their focus when trying
to assess the MEPZ situation. This is because they fail to quantify some
of the critical dynamic impacts that successful zones programs can
catalyze, particularly those involving political-economic processes of
reform.
Ultimately, it is speculation to imagine a counterfactual scenario for
Mauritius, but it is not counterintuitive to advance the hypothesis that
without the MEPZ, or with a “cheaper” MEPZ, or with an MEPZ with
higher wages in the 1970s and 1980s, it is probable that its growth rate
would have been lower. Beyond the reduced static impact, its dynamic
impact would have been less. This in turn would probably have had
negative consequences on the island’s overall strategy of diversification,
would have maintained high dependency on sugar, and may have led to
continuing Dutch disease, capital flights, and sociopolitical instability.
Planned Obsolescence? Export Processing Zones and Structural Reform in Mauritius 241
This is not to say that resources could not have been better utilized.
Evidence suggests that they could have been. But excluding the dynamic
perspective, the analysis thus misses the key point of the Mauritian
experience: the impact of the MEPZ on the island’s path from colonial
monoculture to a sustainable, diversified economy operating within the
international economic system achieving high rankings in political,
economic, and social governance. The zone has played an immense role
in the secular transformation of the island, attracting FDI, generating
massive technology transfers, integrating Mauritius into global commodity
chains, and leading the way toward the creation of a series of growth
poles (the Freeport, the International Banking Center, the Integrated
Resort Scheme, the Cybercity, the new SEZ, etc.) whose combined effect
has been enormous.
Also of fundamental importance has been the contribution of the zone
to political stability, through the provision of employment and the cre-
ation of a “virtuous cycle” of growth and development. Overall, the
MEPZ has acted as an important contributor to transforming the island
into Africa’s premier country in many comparative rankings. It has con-
sistently ranked first in the Mo Ibrahim Index on African Governance. It
has topped the World Bank’s Doing Business Index in Africa, improving its
global position to 17 in 2010. The social benefits of these changes have
been enormous, and some part of these benefits is directly and indirectly
imputable to the MEPZ.
sugar and clothing? While these may be interesting questions, they are almost
certainly the wrong ones for outsiders to ask. The key point is that Mauritius
has reached a stage of development and maturity and sophistication that, long
before the outside world had even recognized the looming challenges, the
Mauritian domestic system had started the necessary processes to confront
them. Whether Mauritius upgrades into high-value added financial services or
information technology (this is already happening), one can be confident that
Mauritius will figure out a way. The world can, in fact, stop worrying about
Mauritius because it has demonstrated the ability to worry for itself. (22)
Notes
1. Political parties did and continue to have either English or French names,
depending on their main constituencies and sources of ideological inspiration.
MMM used Creole, and not French, as its political language.
2. The 1971 4-year Plan for Social and Economic Development, 1971–1975, the first
of a long series of such plans, explicitly recognized the limited impact and scope
of ISI: “Industrialisation, apart from the processing of agricultural crops—sugar
and tea—for export, has been almost wholly geared to meeting the require-
ments of the small domestic market and therefore limited in scope” (pp. v–vi).
3. The governing coalition of the MLP and PMSD confronted the MMM from
1971 on with expansionary social spending on the one hand and repression
on the other, declaring a state of emergency that was lifted only in 1975. At
the time, the MMM was calling for the nationalization of the sugar industry
and radical social changes.
4. The prices used here are constant prices, based on 1982 value in Mauritian
rupees. Although this provides a “real” perspective into the performance of
the zone, it significantly undervalues its performance at current prices.
5. No data are available for 1973–1976 constant prices.
6. According to the Economist Intelligence Unit (cited by Ancharaz 2009),
Mauritius labor costs in the clothing industry were US$1.25 per hour, versus
US$0.39 in Bangladesh, between US$0.68 and US$0.88 in China, US$0.77
in Egypt, US$0.38 in India, US$0.38 in Kenya, US$0.33 in Madagascar,
US$2.45 in Mexico, US$1.38 in South Africa, and US$0.48 in Sri Lanka.
7. In 2000, it was estimated that two large Mauritian firms, Floreal and CMT,
employed 9,000 workers in Malagasy EPZ factories.
8. Bowman (1991, 122) advanced that “the sustained commitment of the
Mauritian government and the political opposition to the structural adjustment
program set the stage for a resounding economic performance in the middle
and late 1980s.”
9. Footwear, apparel, sugar products, and beverages, for instance.
244 Special Economic Zones
References
Ancharaz, V. 2009. “David V. Goliath: Mauritius Facing Up to China.” European
Journal of Development Research 21 (4): 622–43.
Bheenick, R., and M. O. Shapiro. 1991. “The Mauritian Export Processing Zone.”
Public Administration and Development 11: 263–67.
Bowman, L. 1991. Mauritius: Democracy and Development in the Indian Ocean.
Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Carroll, B. W., and T. Carroll. 1997. “State and Ethnicity in Botswana and
Mauritius.” The Journal of Development Studies 33 (4): 464–86.
Dommen, B., and E. Dommen. 1999. Mauritius: The Roots of Success.
A Retrospective Study, 1960–1993. Oxford, UK: James Currey.
Government of Mauritius. 1999. National Productivity and Competitiveness Act
1999. Act No. 9 of 1999, 14 May, 1999.
Government of Mauritius. 2010. Mauritius Productivity and Competitiveness
Indicators: 1999–2009. Port Louis: Central Statistical Office.
Gulhati, R., and R. Nallari. 1990. Successful Stabilization and Recovery in Mauritius.
Washington, DC: World Bank.
Jaycox, E. V. 1992. “Sub-Saharan Africa: Development Performance and
Prospects.” Journal of International Affairs 46 (1): 81–95.
Kearney, R. C. 1990. “Mauritius and the NIC Model Redux: Or, How Many Cases
Make a Model?” Journal of Developing Areas, 24 (2): 195–216.
Meisenhelder, T. 1997. “The Developmental State in Mauritius.” The Journal of
Modern African Studies 35 (2): 279–97.
Paturau, J. M. 1988. Historie economique de I’ile Maurice. Port Louis: Le Pailles.
Roberts, M. W. 1992. Export Processing Zones in Jamaica and Mauritius. Evolution
of an Export-Oriented Model. San Francisco: Mellen Research University
Press.
Rodrik, D. 2004. Getting Institutions Right. CESifo DICE Report, Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University.
Sawkut, R., V. Sannassee, and S. Fowdar. 2009. “The Net Contribution of the
Mauritian Export Processing Zone Using Cost-Benefit Analysis.” Journal of
International Development 21: 379–92.
Subramanian, A. 2009. The Mauritian Success Story and Its Lessons. UNU-WIDER
Research Papers No. 2009/36. Helsinki: UNU-WIDER.
World Bank. 1989. Mauritius, Managing Success. Washington, DC: World Bank.
PA R T I I I
Introduction
It is impossible to discuss the full developmental and social consequences
of SEZs2 without considering the gender dimension. Women constitute
more than 50 percent and in some cases 90 percent of employment in
SEZs in developing countries. Given such high levels of female employ-
ment in SEZs and the important role of SEZs in developing-country
exports, we can fairly conclude that export-oriented industrialization
over the past 30 years has been a distinctly gendered process. The pur-
pose of this chapter is to describe and explain the remarkable degree of
“feminization”3 of work in SEZs in the recent era of export-oriented
industrialization. The following section discusses the scholarly literature
on trade and the feminization of labor. The third section offers a synthetic
theory of feminization, building on the extensive research on industrial
upgrading in global value chains. The fourth section reviews the evidence
of the female intensity of SEZ employment. The fifth section presents the
main characteristics of the quality of female employment in SEZs, and
the sixth section attempts to explain recent trends of the defeminization
of labor in manufacturing. The final section discusses the policy implica-
tions of the analysis and concludes.
247
248 Special Economic Zones
have been constructed anew (Elson 2007, 8). Evidence indicates that
access to paid employment increased women’s self-confidence and asser-
tiveness and led to an improvement in their influence and standing in the
household (Jayaweera 2003, cited in Elson 2007; Kabeer 2000; Zhang
2007). Factory employment afforded women opportunities to exit the
sphere of familial control as well as situations of domestic violence, to
gain financial independence, and to expand their personal autonomy and
life choices. But social norms dictate that women do not always control
the income they earn, and paid work adds to the household work for
which women assume primary responsibility, leaving them less time for
rest and leisure. Besides, women generally remained confined to low-paid
and low-productivity activities in export-oriented manufacturing that
had harsh working conditions and few opportunities for advancement.
These issues are explored further below.
Nicaragua
Jamaica
El Salvador
Bangaladesh
Sri Lanka
Honduras
Philippines
Madagascar
Panama
Korea, Republic of
Mauritius
Mexico
Malaysia
Dominican Republic
Macedonia
Belize
Morocco
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
female share of SEZ employment
female share of nonagricultural employment
for women in the economy (Aggarwal 2007, 20–21). Some authors attri-
bute the low proportion of women in Indian SEZs to the willingness of
male workers to take up the same positions (Murayama and Yokota 2008,
25). Although the exact proportion of women working in SEZs in China
is not available, Fu and Gao (2007, 33) find that the share of female
employees in foreign-funded enterprises (most of them situated in SEZs)
has fluctuated between 50 and 55 percent from 1995 to 2005, while the
The Gender Dimension of Special Economic Zones 259
Kenya
Lesotho
Tanzania
Senegal
Ghana
Nigeria
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
female share of SEZ employment
female share of country non-agricultural employment
Figure 11.3 Female Share of Employment in SEZs by Sector, Select Countries, 2009
garments
electronics
other manufacturing
textiles
services
chemicals
0 20 40 60 80
female share of employment
Figure 11.4 Female Share of Employers and Managers, Select Countries, 2009
Lesotho
Dominican Rep.
Senegal
Kenya
Ghana
Tanzania
Nigeria
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
different labor laws altogether (ILO 2008, 7). Still, in an ILO (2001)
survey, approximately 28 percent of respondents in 19 countries reported
that laws within SEZs differed in some way from those outside, including
more overtime work, lack of retirement provisions, less favorable leave
terms, exemption from occupational safety provisions, and prolonged
temporary contracts (cited in Engman, Onodera, and Pinali 2007, 30).
Although there has been some movement forward in harmonizing laws
within and outside zones, the main problem in SEZs remains government
indifference toward the enforcement of laws and the lack of resources or
capacity for monitoring and supervision (Milberg and Amengual 2008,
58–9). For instance, Vietnam’s labor laws, which were drafted in consulta-
tion with the ILO, include the strongest protection for workers’ rights
and for gender equality in the region, but the lack of enforcement and
monitoring means that many of those provisions simply remain on paper
(Farole 2010).
We present some general characteristics with respect to work and
working conditions in SEZs, although considerable variations exist
between countries, zones, and industries. First, SEZs offer higher or simi-
lar wages and benefits as compared with other sectors of the economy,
but the gender wage gap as well as other forms of discrimination persist.
Second, SEZs are characterized by much longer and frequently illegal
working hours as compared with other sectors of the economy (Milberg
and Amengual 2008, 61). Third, the rights to freedom of association and
collective bargaining are seriously impaired (ICFTU 2004). We will dis-
cuss each by turn as well as discuss gender-related concerns.
Based on country studies, the ILO (2008, 6) reports that wages in
SEZs appear to be at the same level or higher for equivalent work in the
rest of the economy. Studies on Bangladesh, Madagascar, Costa Rica,
Honduras, and Sri Lanka indicate that wages in zones generally tend to
be higher than in sectors outside zones, although which control group is
being used for the comparison is critical (for a summary, see Milberg and
Amengual 2008). However, wage and nonwage discrimination against
women is a continuing reality within SEZs (ILO 2008, 4).19 This is the
case for, instance, in SEZs in Honduras where women earn less than men
for comparable work (Ver beek 2001) and in Madagascar where the
average female wage is lower than the male, with the gap rising from
8 percent for low-skill work to 20 percent for managerial positions (ILO
2008, 4). In Bangladesh, women not only earned less than men because
of their segregation in low-skilled work, but more women also left their
jobs for reasons of low pay than did men (Zohir 2001). The question
264 Special Economic Zones
Defeminization of Employment
The link between export orientation and the feminization of labor has
been critiqued and refined by researchers who argue that it is not export
orientation per se, but rather the type of manufacturing that takes place
within these sectors that matters for female employment. As we have
seen, an overlap exists between the types of industries located within
SEZs, the quality of employment in terms of low wages and flexibility,
and the female intensity of employment. This raises the question of
whether the gains in women’s employment are sustainable over time and
what factors contribute to the defeminization of labor that has been
noted in some countries.24 A number of reasons have been identified in
the literature for this defeminization, including industrial upgrading,
closing of the gender wage gap, cyclical factors such as recessions, and
outsourcing to home-based workers, which leads to statistical defemini-
zation. We will consider each of these in turn bearing in mind that one
or more of these factors might be acting to produce the given outcome
at any time.
Industrial upgrading can be defined as the ability of producers “to
make better products, to make products more efficiently, or to move
into higher-skilled activities” (Pietrobelli and Rabellotti 2006, 1) and
studies on upgrading generally tend to focus on the technological con-
tent of production and on value added (Milberg 2008, 6).25 For our
purposes, the shift of output to more capital- and technology-intensive
sectors as well as the production of higher value added products within
a sector can have implications for the distribution of employment by
sex for a number of reasons. First, as described earlier, the gender-typing
of jobs as masculine and feminine leads to discrimination against women
when industrial upgrading involves heavy, capital-intensive, or skilled
work. Second, women lack access to on-the-job training and retraining
to upgrade their skills when the skill requirements of the job change.
This is partly due to their segmentation in what is considered unskilled
work and partly because employers view women as “unstable workers,”
who will withdraw from the labor force as domestic obligations mount
(Jayasinghe 2001, 72, 73). Third, gender biases operate to segment
The Gender Dimension of Special Economic Zones 267
young women and girls into more “feminine” vocations in the education
system, while reserving the heavy, technical, and often better-paid pro-
fessions for men.
Thus, Fussell (2000, 65) notes that as production became more
technologically intensive in Mexican maquiladoras between 1983 and
1999, the number of female operatives declined from 77 percent to
41 percent, although total employment in maquiladoras grew rapidly
during the period. Jomo (2009) identifies the rise of skill-intensive
manufacturing and the likely gender-typing of new industrial jobs as the
reason for defeminization of export-oriented manufacturing in North
and Southeast Asia in the 1990s. Jayasinghe (2001, 77), in a study on the
Caribbean, explains the predominance of male export workers in
Trinidad by the fact that its major exports were minerals, fuels, and
chemicals and work in these industries was considered heavy and more
skilled. Further, because the few women who are employed are concen-
trated in low-skill processing jobs, where labor costs are of critical
importance, they are rapidly losing employment as a result of mechani-
zation. Caraway (2007, 149) finds a statistically significant and negative
relationship between capital intensity and female employment in manu-
facturing for a sample of countries in East Asia and Latin America from
the late 1950s to mid-1990s.
Tejani and Milberg (2010) find that both the defeminization of labor
in manufacturing in Southeast Asia and the feminization of labor in Latin
America over the period 1985 to 2006 are driven by shifts in manufactur-
ing labor productivity and capital intensity. As proxies for industrial
upgrading, both capital intensity and labor productivity have a statisti-
cally significant and negative relationship with the female intensity of
employment in manufacturing over the period. Figure 11.5 reproduces
the relationship between the female intensity of employment and manu-
facturing productivity for relevant countries.
Other scholars have argued that the feminization of labor “creates
conditions for its own unravelling over time” because the wage differen-
tials that drive feminization tend to decrease over time as the labor mar-
ket tightens and demands for better work conditions and security gain
momentum (Ghosh 2002, 25). That is, the demand for female labor is
contingent on its relative cheapness; once this incentive to hire women
disappears, firms prefer to employ men. Murayama and Yokota (2008,
16–17) attribute the steady decline of the female share of employment
in the Masan SEZ in the Republic of Korea from 85 percent in 1972 to
62 percent in 2001 to massive worker resistance led by young female
268 Special Economic Zones
3
growth of female intensity in Mfg (%)
2.5
2 Brazil
1.5 Peru Venezuela, RB
Panama
1 Colombia Argentina Thailand
Mexico
El Salvador
0.5 Ecuador Costa Rica
Chile
0 Dominican Republic
Philippines
Indonesia Malaysia
–0.5
–1
–4 –3 –2 –1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
growth of Mfg. value added per worker (%)
Source: Authors’ illustration, based on ILO (2009) and World Bank (2009).
Note: MVA = manufacturing value added.
Fitted Line: Y = 0.86 – 0.13X (Adj. Rsq.= 0.24; t-stat = –2.38).
Data availability varies by country. Please contact author for details.
workers in the late 1980s, which led to rapid wage increases across the
board. Additionally, the rise of capital- and technology-intensive produc-
tion in the zone displaced female workers who were employed in labor-
intensive industries. Similarly, as the supply of female workers willing to
work for low wages in Mexican maquiladoras in the 1980s boom fell
because of a tightening labor market, managers were forced to recruit
men for the same jobs (Salzinger 2003, 11).
Rubery (1998) argues that female employment is procyclical and that
women act as a flexible “buffer” labor force to be roped into the work-
force when required and released when not. The buffer explanation
implies that women are employed in larger numbers in periods of expan-
sion and are laid off during recessions, providing one explanation for
defeminization. Such a buffer role is concentrated in particular occupa-
tions in industries that face competitive pressures and greater demand
fluctuations. Kucera (2001) shows this buffer role of female workers in
the 1960s and 1970s in Germany and Japan.26
The Gender Dimension of Special Economic Zones 269
Notes
1. The author is greatly indebted to William S. Milberg, Professor and Chair of
Economics, New School for Social Research, who provided valuable inputs
and advice at every stage of this paper. Thanks are also due to Tom Farole and
Cornelia Staritz, who provided helpful comments on an earlier draft. Any
errors or deficiencies remain the sole responsibility of the author.
2. I use the generic term special economic zone or SEZ to denote a wide variety
of free zones, including export processing zones, free trade zones, and wide
area zones using the typology outlined in chapter 1 of this book. Most SEZs
remain concentrated in manufacturing-related activities, although services
increasingly are being incorporated into the model.
3. Feminization here refers to the rising share of female employment in total
employment.
4. This section draws partially on Tejani and Milberg (2010).
5. Or the ratio of female to male wages for similar work.
6. In what came to be known as the “international division of labor” literature,
scholars argued that cheap female labor in developing countries was not just
incidental in a system of global production, but pivotal to ensuring transna-
tional profits and competitiveness. An entrenched system of gender subordi-
nation lay at the heart of women’s relative disadvantage in the labor market,
which firms seized on to make profits. Further, it was argued, the gendered
division of labor in the patriarchal household provided a blueprint for wom-
en’s integration into the labor market, confining them to low-paid, labor-
intensive work (Elson and Pearson 1981; Fernandez Kelly 1989).
7. See Seguino (2000b) for the impact of gender inequality on growth through
the channel of exports and investment for a group of semi-industrialized
countries in Asia and Latin America from 1975 to 1995.
8. About one-half of the workers in the world are in occupations that can be
classified as “male” or “female” based on the fact that at least 80 percent of
The Gender Dimension of Special Economic Zones 273
workers therein belong to a single sex. Further, not only are male-dominated
occupations much more numerous than female, the latter “tend to be less
valuable with lower pay, lower status and fewer advancement possibilities as
compared to ‘male’ occupations” (Anker 1998, 407).
9. But contrary to the belief that female workers are inherently compliant and
productive, Salzinger (2003, 10) contends that ideal workers are “produced”
through repeated invocation in managerial discourse and shop-floor practices
that employ gendered strategies to enhance productivity. Thus, female work-
ers do not innately display the required “feminine attributes” that can be put
to use in production, but rather, those attributes are elicited and performed
because they serve productive interests in the factory, with multiple possi-
bilities for disruption and resistance.
10. I borrow this term from Madani (1999), though I use it in a different spirit.
11. See Strom (1989) for a description of the process by which U.S. office work
became feminized in the early 20th century; also see Walsh (1997).
12. Caraway (2007, 133), for instance, highlights the role of unions in keeping the
female share of employment in manufacturing in Latin America tradition-
ally low.
13. In turn, firms will internalize production processes that protect rents accruing
from firm-specific and knowledge-based assets, which are possible to main-
tain only in an oligopolistic industry with firms that enjoy economies of scale
and market power (Milberg 2004, 60–1).
14. The structure of GVCs is by no means homogenous. See Gereffi, Humphrey,
and Sturgeon (2005) for the different forms of governance and Milberg
(2004) for an anatomy of cost markups and value added in GVCs.
15. Gereffi (1999) documents the shift from assembly activities to “full-package
production” and supplier-oriented production in developing countries.
16. For the rise in imports and precipitous decline in prices of clothing in the
United States, see Heintz (2006, 508).
17. Ironically, the current commodities boom means a complete reversal of the
Prebisch-Singer predictions.
18. This does not necessarily imply a lack of dynamism, however, as upgrading
can occur within an industry to full package production (Milberg and
Amegual 2007, 9) and to more technologically intensive products.
19. A recent meta-analysis of the gender wage gap showed that a fall in the
gender wage gap worldwide was due to the increased labor market productiv-
ity of females even as the discriminatory component of the wage gap held
steady (Weichselbaumer and Winter-Ebmer 2003).
20. China fares particularly poorly on this count as compared with Asia and other
regions (Berik 2006, 62.)
274 Special Economic Zones
21. The recent fire in a garment factory in the Ashulia Industrial Zone in
Bangladesh that killed 25 people and injured more than a 100 is a grim
reminder of these poor safety standards (“Bangladesh Factory Fire Kills 25,”
December 15, 2010).
22. The ICFTU (2004) reports complaints of harassment in Bangladesh,
Dominican Republic, Kenya, and Mexico.
23. More recently, however, Bangladesh has been the site for great labor unrest as
garment factory workers in EPZs in Dhaka and Chittagong protested the fact
that firms have not implemented overdue pay hikes ordered by the govern-
ment. The protests turned violent as police clashed with the protestors lead-
ing to the death of three people and dozens of injuries (“Three killed, dozens
hurt in Bangladesh clashes,” December 12, 2010).
24. Barrientos, Kabeer, and Hossain (2004, 5) summarize declining trends in the
female share of employment for a number of countries.
25. In the GVC literature, upgrading can mean moving to a more advantageous
position in the chain by making higher value added products or performing
more valuable functions. And upgrading can include process, product, func-
tional, or intersectoral upgrading (see Milberg and Winkler 2008, 6–7, and
references therein).
26. On the other hand, downturns might motivate the search for cost-saving solu-
tions leading to the substitution of male workers with female workers and a
rising feminization of labor. In gender-segmented occupations, female employ-
ment would be related more to secular trends in sectoral structures rather
than to cyclical factors (Rubery 1988). It is beyond the scope of this chapter
to identify which of these hypotheses might be operating within a given
period of time, although they provide a useful framework for thinking about
defeminization.
27. See Chen, Sebstad, and O’Connell (1999) for a discussion of the limitation
of official statistics on the informal sector.
References
Aggarwal, A. 2007. Impact of Special Economic Zones on Employment, Poverty and
Human Development. Working Paper No. 194. New Delhi: Indian Council for
Research on International Economic Relations.
Anker, R. 1998. Gender and Jobs: Sex Segregation of Occupations in the World.
Geneva: International Labor Office.
Arndt, S., and H. Kierzkowski. 2001. “Introduction.” In Fragmentation:
New Production Patterns in the World Economy, edited by S. Arndt and
H. Kierzkowski, 1–16. New York: Oxford University Press.
The Gender Dimension of Special Economic Zones 275
Carr, M., M. A. Chen, and J. Tate. 2004. “Globalization and Home-based Workers.”
Feminist Economics 6 (3): 123–42.
Cattaneo, O., G. Gereffi, and C. Staritz. 2010. Global Value Chains in a Postcrisis
World: A Development Perspective. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Chamarbagwala, R. 2006. “Economic Liberalization and Wage Inequality in
India.” World Development 34 (12): 1997–2015.
Chang, L. T. (2008). Factory Girls: From Village to City in a Changing China. New
York: Spiegel & Grau.
Chen, M., J. Sebstad, and L. O’Connell. 1999. “Counting the Invisible Workforce:
The Case of Homebased Worker.” World Development 27 (3): 603–10.
Cling, J., and G. Letilly. 2001. Export Processing Zones: A Threatened Instrument for
Global Economy Insertion? Document de Travail, DT/2001/17. Development
et insertion internationale, Paris.
Engman, M., O. Onodera, and E. Pinali. 2007. Export Processing Zones: Past and
Future Role in Trade and Development. OECD Trade Policy Working Paper
No. 53. Paris: Trade Committee, OECD.
Elson, D. 2007. “International Trade and Gender Equality: Women as Achievers of
Competitive Advantage and as Sources of Competitive Advantage.” Paper
prepared for International Symposium on Gender at the Heart of Globalization,
March 21–23, 2007, Paris.
Elson, D., and R. Pearson. 1981. “‘Nimble Fingers Make Cheap Workers’: An
Analysis of Women’s Employment in Third World Export Manufacturing.”
Feminist Review 7 (Spring): 87–107.
Farole, T. 2010. “Case Studies on Special Economic Zones.” Mimeo. Washington,
DC: World Bank.
Feenstra, R. 1998. “Integration of Trade, Disintegration of Production.” Journal of
Economic Perspectives 12 (4): 31–50.
Fernandez Kelly, P. 1989. “Broadening the Scope: Gender and International
Economic Development.” Sociological Forum 4 (4): 611–35.
Fu, X., and Y. Gao. 2007. Export Processing Zones in China: A Survey. Geneva:
International Labour Organization.
Fussell, E. 2000. “Making Labor Flexible: The Recomposition of Tijuana’s
Maquiladora Female Labor Force.” Feminist Economics 6 (3): 59–79.
Gereffi, G. 1999. “International Trade and Industrial Upgrading in the Apparel
Commodity Chain.” Journal of International Economics 48 (1999): 37–70.
Gereffi, G. 2005. The New Offshoring of Jobs and Global Development. ILO Social
Policy Lectures. Geneva: International Institute for Labour Studies.
Gereffi, G., J. Humphrey, and T. Sturgeon. 2005. “The Governance of Global
Value Chains.” Review of International Political Economy 12 (1): 78–104.
The Gender Dimension of Special Economic Zones 277
GET (Global Employment Trends). 2009. Global Employment Trends for Women.
Geneva: International Labour Organization.
Ghosh, J. 2002. “Globalisation, Export-Oriented Employment for Women and
Social Policy: A Case Study of India.” Social Scientist 30 (11/12): 17–60.
Glick, P., and S. Roubaud. 2006. “Export Processing Zone Expansion in
Madagascar: What Are the Labor Market and Gender Impacts?” Journal of
African Economies 15 (4): 722–56.
Gopalkrishnan, R. 2007. Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining in Export
Processing Zones: Role of the ILO Supervisory Mechanism. Working Paper No. 1,
International Labour Standards Department. Geneva: International Labour
Office.
Gray, M., M. C. Kittilson, and W. Sandholtz. 2006. “Women and Globalization:
A Study of 180 Countries, 1975–2000.” International Organization 60:
293–333.
Hancock, P., S. Middleton, and J. Moore. 2009. “Export Processing Zones
(EPZs), Globalisation, Feminised Labour Markets and Working Conditions:
A Study of Sri Lankan Workers.” Labour and Management in Development
10: 1–22.
Heintz, J. 2006. “Low-Wage Manufacturing and Global Commodity Chains:
A Model in the Unequal Exchange Tradition.” Cambridge Journal of Economics
30: 507–20.
Horton, S. 1999. “Marginalization Revisited: Women’s Market Work and Pay, and
Economic Development.” World Development 27 (3): 571–82.
ICFTU (International Confederation of Free Trade Unions). 2004. Behind the
Brand Names. International Confederation of Free Trade Unions.
ILO (International Labour Organization). 2001. Follow-up and Promotion on the
Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises and
Social Policy: (a) Seventh Survey on the Effect Given to the Tripartite Declaration
of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy. Analytical
report of the Working Group on the reports submitted by governments and
by employers’ and workers’ organizations, GB.280/MNE/1/1. Geneva:
International Labour Organization.
ILO. 2003. Employment and Social Policy in Respect of Export Processing Zones
(EPZs). Committee on Employment and Social Policy, Document No.
GB.286/ESP/3. Geneva: International Labour Office.
ILO. 2005. Promoting Fair Globalization in Textiles and Clothing in a Post-MFA
Environment. Geneva: International Labour Organization.
ILO. 2008. Employment and Social Policy in Respect of Export Processing Zones
(EPZs). Committee on Employment and Social Policy, Document No.
GB.301/ESP/5. Geneva: International Labour Office.
278 Special Economic Zones
Kusago, T., and Z. Tzannatos. 1998. Export Processing Zones: A Review in Need
of an Update. Discussion Paper Series, No. 9802. Washington, DC: World
Bank.
Lutz, N. M. 1988. “Images of Docility: Asian Women and the World Economy.” In
Racism, Sexism and the World-System, edited by J. Smith, 57–74. New York:
Greenwood.
Madani. D. 1999. A Review of the Role and Impact of Export Processing Zones.
PREM-EP. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Mehra, R., and S. Gammage. 1999. “Trends, Counter-trends and Gaps in Women’s
Employment.” World Development 27 (3): 533–50.
McKy, S. C. 2006. “Hard Drives and Glass Ceilings: Gender Stratification in
Hi-tech Production.” Gender and Society 20 (2): 207–35.
Menon, N., and Y. M. Rodgers. 2008. “International Trade and the Gender Wage
Gap: New Evidence from India’s Manufacturing Sector.” World Development
37 (5): 965–81.
Milberg, W. 2004. “The Changing Structure of Trade Linked to Global Production
Systems: What Are the Policy Implications?” International Labour Review
143 (1–2): 45–90.
Milberg, W., and Amengual. 2008. Economic Development and Working Conditions
in Export Processing Zones: A Survey of Trends. Working Paper 3, ILO. Geneva:
International Labour Office.
Milberg, W., and D. Winkler. 2008. “Measuring Economic and Social Upgrading in
Global Production Networks.” Concept Note prepared for DFID grant
“Capturing the Gains: Economic and Social Upgrading in Global Production
Networks.” London: U.K. Department for International Development.
Mitra-Kahn, B. H., and T. Mitra-Kahn. 2007. “Gender Wage Gaps and Growth:
What Goes Up Must Come Down.” Unpublished manuscript.
Mitter, S. 2003. “Globalization and ICT: Employment Opportunities for Women.”
Paper commissoned for Gender Advisory Board Policy Research Programme,
“Gender Dimensions of Science and Technology Policy: Research in New
Critical Issues.” United Nations Commission on Science and Technology for
Development.
Murayama, M., and N. Yokota. 2008. Revisiting Labour and Gender Issues in Export
Processing Zones: The Case of South Korea, Bangladesh and India. IDE
Discussion Paper No. 174. Japan: Institute of Developing Economies.
Ngai, P. 2004. “Women Workers and Precarious Employment in Shenzhen Special
Economic Zone, China.” Gender and Development 12 (2): 29–36.
Oostendorp, R. H. 2004. Globalization and the Gender Wage Gap. World Bank
Policy Research Paper No. 3256, April. Washington, DC: World Bank.
280 Special Economic Zones
Introduction
The climate change agenda has emerged as a core development challenge
of our time as it became obvious that countries cannot continue a devel-
opment paradigm of the past depending on heavy fossil-fuel and green-
house gas (GHG) emissions. Deep cuts in global emissions are required
to hold the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius (2°C),
and this will not be possible to meet without full participation by all the
countries.
There has been a growing consensus that all the countries have to
participate in global efforts to fight climate change in accordance with
the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities and respec-
tive capabilities,” as clearly stipulated in the Article 3 of the United
Nations Convention on Climate Change. The Copenhagen Accord,
which came out of the Climate Change Summit in December and to
which more than 100 countries have committed, states in Article 5 that
developing countries will implement nationally appropriate mitigation
actions and shall communicate such actions.
To developing countries, development and climate change are two
interlinked challenges, neither of which can be sacrificed. These countries
283
284 Special Economic Zones
have to lift 1.4 billion people out of poverty by building factories, power
plants, roads, buildings, and transport systems, while ensuring that they
comply with environmental sustainability and significantly reduce their
carbon footprints along the way. The Copenhagen Accord reflects such
need in Article 2, bearing in mind that social and economic development
and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities of develop-
ing countries and that a low-emission development strategy is indispen-
sible to sustainable development.
In this regard, exploring new ways to pursue low-carbon and green
growth, a new development paradigm, is a big task ahead. This new
development paradigm is meant to decouple economic growth from fur-
ther increases in GHG emissions. This paradigm also seeks to create jobs
based on the development and deployment of clean technologies. It is
important to come to a common understanding that shifting to a low-
carbon, green economy does not mean sacrificing competitiveness and
economic growth; but rather, is an investment in long-term sustainable
economic development.
Source: Authors.
Note: GHG = greenhouse gases; SEZ = special economic zone.
286 Special Economic Zones
• GHG Mitigation Target: The economic activities inside the SEZ are
aligned with concrete action plans for mitigation. As such, a low-carbon,
green SEZ can establish a goal and commitment to GHG mitigation at
the center of its overall strategy (e.g., SEZ-wide 30 percent reduction
mitigation
target
sustainable climate-friendly
infrastructure investment generation
LC-SEZ
low-carbon
carbon finance
policy framework
Source: Authors.
Note: LC-SEZ = low-carbon, green special economic zone.
288 Special Economic Zones
12
GHG emmissions
10 projections
8
GHG emissions
X% reduction
compared to BAU
6
0
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
GHG emissions projection
BAU LC policy
Source: Authors.
Note: BAU = business as usual; GHG = greenhouse gas; LC = low carbon.
290 Special Economic Zones
accuracy and credibility of such data. By nature, GHG emission data are
closely linked to energy generation and consumption data, which makes
integrated management of such data sets more efficient. Companies and
institutions above a certain level of annual GHG emission in an SEZ
should be required to monitor and report their GHG emission data on
an annual basis to the appropriate authority. According to the Copenhagen
Accord (Article 5), developing countries are supposed to communicate
mitigation actions, including national inventory reports, every two years.
The SEZ authority also needs to carry out an analysis of how much GHG
emission is projected by a certain point (e.g., 2020) according to its cur-
rent SEZ development plan (the base scenario) and to identify how
much GHG emission reduction potential exists in each sector through a
diverse set of mitigation measures (the policy scenario). Such analysis
may need top-down macroeconomic modeling exercises as well as
bottom-up surveys. Generally, most GHG emissions in an SEZ come
from energy consumption, such as electricity, heating, cooling, industrial
process, transportation, and water and waste disposal (see figure 12.4).
5%
15%
30%
20%
30%
power generation
industry
buildings
transportation
waste
Source: Authors.
Note: GHG = greenhouse gas; SEZ = special economic zone.
Low-Carbon, Green Special Economic Zones 291
Sustainable Infrastructure
Planning, designing, and building zone infrastructure in energy-efficient,
resource-saving, waste-recycling ways from the outset could provide
ample opportunities to reduce an SEZ’s carbon footprint. Energy supply
and demand, green buildings, and waste recycling systems are important
examples. Such infrastructure investment would be sustainable only
when medium- and long-term social and economic benefits surpass incre-
mental cost increases in the short term. For instance, making buildings in
China more energy efficient would add 10 percent to construction costs
but would save more than 50 percent on energy cost (Shalizi and Lecocq
2009). Integrated zero-emission building designs, which combine energy-
efficiency measures with on-site power and heat from solar power and
biomass, are technically and economically feasible, and their costs are fall-
ing (Brown, Southworth, and Stovall 2005).
First, in terms of energy supply infrastructure, providing some portion
of electricity through renewable energy is an important element of low-
carbon, green SEZs. To meet the 450 parts per million, 2°C goal, most
developing countries would need to boost their production of renewable
energy. It is important to identify suitable sources of renewable energy,
such as biomass, solar, wind, hydro, and geothermal, for certain SEZs in
the context of national circumstances. For instance, in India, wind power
would be one of easier options for SEZs, taking into account that the
nation has the fifth-largest installed wind power capacity in the world. As
a second-best option, when renewable energy is not readily available in
terms of technical or financial feasibility, even increasing the average effi-
ciency of coal-fired power plants can reduce GHG emission. For instance,
China has increased the average efficiency of coal-fired power plants by
15 percent over the last decade to an average of 34 percent. Replacing
small-scale coal-fired power plants with large-scale efficient plants over
the last few years reduced annual CO2 emissions by 60 million tons. An
SEZ could commit to a certain target for renewable energy supply, which
would be higher than the national average. According to India’s Guidelines
for Energy Conservation in SEZ (October 27, 2010), 100 percent of
organic waste generated within SEZs should be used for in-situ power
generation or vermi-composted, as applicable. Also, external lighting in
292 Special Economic Zones
common spaces may comply with the requirement that at least 10 per-
cent of the installed load should be solar powered during the first year of
operation, and the installed load must be extended by at least 5 percent
annually until a target of 50 percent is achieved. The use of incandescent
lamps is not allowed. The Vision and Roadmap for Haiti (May 23, 2010)
prepared by the Private Sector Economic Forum of Haiti and presented
to the government of Haiti states that in five years, 15 percent of energy
needs to come from renewable energy sources, mostly in housing and
industrial parks.
In the short term, the largest and cheapest source of emission reduc-
tion is increased energy efficiency on both the supply and demand side
in power, industry, buildings, and transport. Energy efficiency offers the
biggest source (approximately 60 percent) of emission reduction,
according to the International Energy Agency. A range of measures can
be taken, from simply replacing road lights with energy-efficient light-
emitting diode lights (LEDs) to bringing new energy-efficient tech-
nologies to industrial processes and managing the load profiles of
individual industrial production. Some examples include energy-
efficient process equipment, industrial air conditioning, electrical power,
power transmission and distribution, heating and cooling of industrial
and commercial space, and lighting. For instance, in India, a large poten-
tial exists to reduce the 29 percent losses in transmission and distribu-
tion to a level closer to the world average of 9 percent, which will
smooth out peak demand and lessen the pressure to build more fossil-
fueled power plants.
Buildings provide good opportunities for GHG mitigation. For some
large-scale SEZs with many factories and commercial and residential
buildings, emissions from the building sector account for a considerable
portion of total emissions. Putting energy-efficient measures into the
design and planning stage, such as energy-efficient heating and cooling
systems, insulation, natural ventilation, and efficient lighting, could effec-
tively reduce emissions in a sustainable way. For existing buildings, a
dramatic change would not be possible; however, retrofitting some older
buildings into more energy-efficient buildings actually could make busi-
ness sense in that long-term energy saving would be greater than the
upfront investment (as seen in many of the recent retrofitting examples
in high-income countries). An appropriate set of incentive programs
could facilitate such investment. The SEZ authority needs to employ
administrative action programs, such as green building codes, that can be
enforced during the building review process to ensure that buildings
Low-Carbon, Green Special Economic Zones 293
across the zone as a whole meet minimum standards and reduce the car-
bon footprint.
Waste reuse and recycling is a quick win through which companies
can reap the concrete benefits upon implementation. Recycling can be
done at the individual company level, but when it is done across multiple
companies in low-carbon, green SEZs, the benefits can be maximized. For
instance, a textile company, SAE-A Trading Co., installed an incinerator
in a Nicaragua factory to utilize regenerated heat energy. The company
completed combustion of fabric wastes and utilized steam generated by
heating water during the ironing process to generate energy, which helped
the company save energy costs and reduce GHG emission. The Republic
of Korea applies the industrial symbiosis concept to its industrial parks
(see figure 12.5). It transforms industrial parks into comprehensive and
collective networks of waste, energy, and information exchanges.
to fDi Markets data (Brownell 2009), between January 2003 and August
2009, there have been more than 1,400 cross-border greenfield invest-
ment projects in renewable energy. In terms of energy-efficiency invest-
ment, energy service companies (ESCOs) could provide energy-efficiency
services (such as energy auditing), recommend energy-saving measures,
provide financing to clients, and serve as project aggregators. ESCOs are
not just limited to the high-income-country environment. In China, for
example, after a decade of capacity building supported by the World
Bank, the ESCO industry grew from three companies in 1997 to more
than 400, with US$1 billion in energy performance contracts in 2007
(World Bank 2008). Such investment in renewables and energy efficiency
is expected to grow as more developing countries race toward a low-
carbon development path. Conversely, investment in traditional indus-
tries such as steel, chemicals, and textiles can be “greened” by bringing in
more energy-efficient or clean technologies to reduce GHG emission and
by “greening” some parts of the value chain with low-carbon technologies.
For instance, a steel company, POSCO, is introducing a new eco-friendly
FINEX technology and processes in building a new steel plant in India.
FINEX, which POSCO has developed, is an environmentally friendly
iron-making process that allows the direct use of iron ore fines and non-
coking coal as feedstock. As a result, the emission of pollutants will be
drastically reduced, to levels of only 4–8 percent of traditional steel pro-
duction processes.
To institutionalize the carbon factor into the investment decision pro-
cess, the SEZ authority may require that all investment projects report
GHG emission estimation throughout the project life cycle. Currently, all
new real sector projects in IFC require GHG estimation before they can
receive approval.
Attracting green FDI could draw in domestic investors in this area,
developing further linkages with local suppliers. Clean technology
transfer and deployment is one of the most important issues enabling
developing countries to build capacity and fight climate change. In fact,
an attractive investment climate for FDI could be critical to accelerating
technology transfer and absorption (Goldberg, Branstetter, Goddard, and
Kuriakose 2008). The Copenhagen Accord (Article 11) emphasizes estab-
lishing the technology mechanism to accelerate technology development
and transfer. To maximize spillover of low-carbon technologies, low-
carbon, green SEZs could explore the “clean technology center” concept,
in which companies, local universities, and research institutes collaborate
to develop, transfer, and deploy clean technologies through a PPP model.
Low-Carbon, Green Special Economic Zones 297
basic
institutional legal
low-carbon
framework
regulatory incentive
Source: Authors.
Legal Framework
Developing a conducive legal framework is fundamental to ensuring a
transparent and predictable business environment for SEZs as well as for
climate change mitigation. Currently, most countries with SEZ programs
have SEZ legislation in place, and many high-income and middle-income
developing countries have completed or are legislating comprehensive
climate change law. In addition, many countries have established renew-
able energy or energy-efficiency laws (e.g., Brazil, China, India). These
laws institutionalize incentives and regulations to promote renewable
energy or energy-efficiency programs. Considering the generally accepted
best practices for a legal framework surrounding climate change,
Low-Carbon, Green Special Economic Zones 299
renewable energy, energy efficiency, and SEZs, the key issue is how to
incorporate low-carbon, green SEZ components into the current legal
framework. Different countries may have different solutions. One solu-
tion is to incorporate low-carbon aspects into SEZ laws. Low-carbon ele-
ments could be required for SEZ approval and designation. Another
solution is to include a low-carbon aspect in general climate change leg-
islation. The contents of climate change legislation vary depending on
countries, but some (such as the Republic of Korea’s Low-Carbon, Green
Growth Basic Law) stipulate a basis for developing a low-carbon indus-
trial cluster or complex. More fundamentally, countries need to legally
define the meaning of “low-carbon” or “green” to prevent confusion or
overexpansion. These terms might be used frequently to determine the
beneficiaries of diverse incentives or regulations.
Regulatory Framework
According to conventional wisdom, environmental regulations could
contribute to creating markets and advancing technological innovation
versus suffocating businesses. For instance, the state of California—known
for its superior leadership in environmental performance and energy
efficiency—has pioneered one of the strongest regulations for its environ-
ment in advance of other states in the United States. Of course, regula-
tion alone cannot claim all the credit, because regulations need to be
supplemented with incentives for consumers and producers. Some of
best practices that can be applied to a low-carbon, green SEZ include
energy-efficiency standards for sectors, green building codes, climate
change impact assessment, and RPS. For utilities, RPS means that some
portion of power supply should come from renewable sources. The SEZ
authority may require that investors disclose their GHG emission estima-
tion for investment projects above a certain level, and that businesses as
well as buildings monitor and report annual GHG emission data. In a
country where comprehensive climate change mitigation measures
already are being taken, low-carbon, green SEZs could follow suit, but
could aim higher than the national average.
Incentive System
In many countries, SEZs have diverse incentive systems in place, includ-
ing corporate tax reductions or exemption; duty-free importation of raw
materials, capital goods, and intermediate inputs; no restrictions or taxes
on capital and profits repatriation; tax relief for foreign workers and
executives; exemption from most local and indirect taxes; financial
300 Special Economic Zones
Institutional Framework
An institutional champion, such as a dedicated agency in charge of cli-
mate change policy, is essential to coordinate multiple stakeholders and
promote and manage relevant policy issues. In a low-carbon, green SEZ, a
dedicated department in charge of low-carbon initiatives needs to be
established inside the SEZ authority. Because low-carbon initiatives are
multidisciplinary, involving energy, environment, buildings, transportation,
Low-Carbon, Green Special Economic Zones 301
and investor aftercare, could be used for CDM projects. One business
executive from Sierra Leone has pointed out that existing channels
handing FDI matters in developing countries could be made to handle
CDM matters as FDI and CDM are interlinked (Keili 2003).
References
Asia Business (in Korean). Dec. 8, 2009. “Incheon Free Economic Zone aims to
reduce GHG emissions 30% by 2030.” http://www.ajnews.co.kr/view.
jsp?newsId=20091208000189.
Ban, Young Un. 2010. “Eco-industrial Park Strategies in Korea.” Regulatory
Reform for Green Growth conference, Seoul, Korea, November 4–5.
Branstetter, L., R. Fisman, and C. F. Foley. 2005. Do Stronger Intellectual Property
Rights Increase International Technology Transfer? Empirical Evidence from U.S.
Firm-Level Data. Working Paper No. 11516. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau
of Economic Research.
Brewer, T. L. 2008. International Energy Technology Transfer for Climate Change
Mitigation: What, Who, How, Why, When, Where, How Much . . . and the
Implications for International Institutional Architecture. Working Paper No.
2048. Venice: CESifo.
Brown, M. A., F. Southworth, and T. K. Stovall. 2005. Toward a Climate-Friendly
Built Environment. Arlington, VA: Pew Center on Global Climate Change.
Brownell, G. Global outlook: “Renewable energy—Just a load of hot air?” Foreign
Direct Investment (fDI): December 2009.
Chatham House and E3G, 2008. “Low Carbon Zones: A transformational agenda
for China and Europe.” December 2001. London: Chatham House.
Chatham House, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences,Energy Research Institute,
Jilin University, and E3G. 2010. “Low Carbon Development Roadmap for
Jilin City.” March 2010. London: Chatham House.
Christensen, J. 1999. Proceedings of the Industry & Environment Workshop, held
at the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad.
Climate Action Reserve. Available at http://www.climateactionreserve.org/
resources/climate-change-facts/.
Low-Carbon, Green Special Economic Zones 307
World Bank. 2010. World Development Report 2010, Development and Climate
Change. Washington, DC: World Bank.
World Bank, FIAS. 2008. Special Economic Zones, performance, lessons learned and
implications for zone development. Washington DC: World Bank.
Index
A B
Adamjee EPZ, Bangladesh, 28 Bahrain, 257
Adapting Singapore Experience Office, 108 Bangladesh EPZs (BEPZs)
ADOZONA (Dominican Association of background, 25–26
Free Zones), 166, 172, 173, 175 challenges faced by
AFTA (Association of Southeast Nations diversification of the industrial
(ASEAN) Free Trade Area), 133 base, 41
Agreement on Subsidies and reform of existing regime, 41–43
Countervailing Measures (SCM), wage and conditions
WTO, 172 competitiveness, 38–40
Algeria-China Jiangling Economic and country overview, 9–10
Trade Cooperation Zone, domestic market linkages, 31–33
79–80, 92 Economic Zones Act, 26, 42, 43
Amapala Free Zone, Honduras, 48 employment, 31
Andean Community, 133 exports, 30–31
apparel sector female share of employment,
Bangladesh garment industry, 26 31, 257
in the Dominican Republic, 160, firms and investment, 29–30
168–169, 170f, 173 garment industry status, 26
labor laws and women, 264 historical development of, 27–29
in Mauritius, 232, 233f key success factors
ASEAN (Association of Southeast administrative regime efficiency, 36
Nations), 41, 133 incentives, 36–38
Asian Development Bank, 286 investment climate, 34–35
Association of Southeast Nations market size, 34
(ASEAN) Free Trade Area serviced land and infrastructure,
(AFTA), 133, 150 35–36
Australia, 133–134 wages, 34
309
310 Index
Yet policy makers appear to be increasingly attracted to economic zones. Since the mid-1980s,
the number of newly-established zones has grown rapidly in almost all regions, with dramatic
expansion in developing countries. In parallel with this growth, and in the evolving global
trade and investment context, zones are also undergoing significant change in both their form
and function, with traditional export processing zones (EPZs) increasingly giving way to larger
and more flexible SEZ models. This will bring opportunities for developing countries to better
take advantage of the dynamic potential of zones, but will also raise new challenges to their
successful design and development.
This collection of papers aims to contribute to an improved understanding of the role and
practice of SEZs in developing countries, in order to better equip policy makers in planning
and implementing SEZ programs. Organized around three broad themes—attracting
investment and creating jobs, facilitating dynamic benefits, and ensuring sustainability—
this book addresses many of the emerging issues and challenges in SEZs with practical case
examples from SEZ programs in developing countries, including China, the Dominican
Republic, Bangladesh, Honduras, and Mauritius.
The World Bank’s International Trade Department produces and disseminates policy-
oriented knowledge products and forges partnerships on trade to advance an inclusive
trade agenda for developing countries and to enhance developing countries’ trade
competitiveness in global markets. Learn more about the World Bank’s trade portfolio
at: www.worldbank.org/trade.
ISBN 978-0-8213-8763-4
SKU 18763